Lunar Refueling: Legal Issues and Suggested Solutions

By Francesca Giannoni-Crystal June, 2025

The establishment of settlements and economic activities on the Moon is expected to occur in the near future, positioning the Moon as a critical hub for continued exploration of the Solar System. Central to this development is the creation of a lunar refueling industry, which will play a pivotal role in supporting lunar activities and fostering further exploration.
Lunar refueling, which includes extracting local resources like lunar ice water to obtain hydrogen, offers key benefits, such as reducing the need for resupply missions from Earth, lowering launch costs, extending mission capabilities, and enabling launches from the Moon, which are more cost-effective due to the Moon’s lower gravitational pull. While lunar refueling is expected to empower the lunar economy and transform the Moon into a gateway for deep-space missions, facilitating exploration of destinations like Mars and asteroids, it also raises legal and environmental concerns.
This Paper does not address environmental concerns; it focuses instead on some of the legal questions, arising particularly under the Outer Space Treaty (“OST”), discussing potential implications of Articles II, IX, and XII OST on lunar refueling, and arguing the issues are manageable. Further, the Paper examines the possibility of conflicts arising from competition for prime locations and potential interference.
Given the current unlikelihood of negotiating new treaties or amending existing ones, this Paper advocates for the development of industry-sponsored guidelines for the lunar refueling industry to foster common practices, incorporate ethical standards, ensure compliance with the OST, and promote safer operations.
The Paper also advocates for voluntary cooperation among stakeholders, in the form of shared facilities, resource pooling, and network contracts, arguing that these instruments–besides promoting efficiency–can also help foster compliance with the OST, enhance coordination, and mitigate the risk of conflicts. The proposed guidelines and the suggested cooperative and coordinated solutions may also be environmentally beneficial and foster sustainability.

Introduction

Lunar settlements, orbital habitats, and economic activities are anticipated to take place relatively soon in cislunar and lunar space.¹ This will mark a shift in humanity’s approach to space exploration, with the Moon becoming a key hub for the continued exploration of the Solar System.² According to a Lockheed Martin white paper, flourishing international community will exist on the Moon by the 2040s, driven by its role as a testing ground and resource hub for human expansion into the Solar System.³ The Moon’s harsh environment presents ideal conditions for preparing technology and procedures for Mars exploration, while its resources may support sustainable operations in deep space, reducing dependence on expensive Earth launches.⁴ By the 2040s, lunar resource development may even bring value back to Earth orbit.⁵ Finally, the white paper’s authors imagine the development of a “large cryogenic propellant refinery and depot” on stable orbit around the Moon, and more.⁶

While this vision is, of course, speculative, it is grounded in credible projections,⁷ aligned with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (“NASA”) “Moon to Mars” architecture⁸ and the “Artemis Program.”⁹ While the precise scope of the Artemis Program might have become less certain in light of shifting programmatic and budgetary priorities under the Trump Administration,¹⁰ proposals of Lockheed Martin’s engineers are not entirely dependent on Artemis. One of the white paper’s major pillars lies in building a water-based propulsion economy centered on hydrogen and oxygen sourced from lunar ice, independent of Artemis,¹¹ but also, more generally, the authors envision a multi-stakeholder lunar economy, anticipating commercial actors, international partnerships, and private logistics chains, which can function regardless of Artemis continuity.¹² This is not to say that the Artemis Program’s scaling back might not lead to delays or restructuring, particularly with respect to large-scale infrastructure, as commercial entities remain heavily dependent on government support. A contraction in public spending could significantly slow progress.¹³ On the other hand, predictions are hard to make, as for example national security needs might cause contracts with the Department of Defense to take the place of NASA’s contracts.¹⁴

Most importantly, visions of lunar development, such as Lockheed Martin’s, include establishing a sustainable lunar refueling industry, crucial for supporting activities on the Moon and further exploration. This capability will significantly reduce reliance on costly Earth-based resupply missions, extend mission capacities, allow for launches from the Moon – where reduced gravitational forces make launches significantly more economical – and finally, it will advance deep-space missions.¹⁵

A number of governments have already acknowledged that the ability to refuel on orbit is pivotal for space activities,¹⁶ and that lunar refueling services for satellites, launch vehicles, landers, rovers, and other space objects are integral components of In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing (“ISAM”).¹⁷ Central to the establishment of a lunar refueling industry will be fuel extraction and storage; harvesting lunar resources, particularly extracting hydrogen from lunar ice water,¹⁸ which provoke pressing environmental and legal concerns, particularly regarding the application of the Outer Space Treaty (“OST”).¹⁹

Leaving to others a full discussion of environmental concerns, this paper focuses on legal issues. Part II discusses the implications of Article II of the OST, which prohibits national appropriation of celestial bodies, and explores the repercussions this prohibition could have on resource extraction for fuel production and argues that the best interpretation of the Treaty’s Article II is that appropriation and use of these resources are not prohibited. Further, Part II considers potential implications for establishing facilities connected to refueling services (e.g., fuel depots), which could imply de facto appropriation of lunar ground, if this means excluding others or asserting priority over certain locations. The Paper argues that the OST’s other provisions, particularly Article XII, might support the legality of these facilities – even if they exclude others. Next, Part II explores the implications of the “due regard” and “harmful interference” provisions found in Article IX OST on the establishment of a refueling industry and further discusses how the refueling industry could compete over resource-rich areas or prime refueling locations (e.g., stable orbits), potentially causing conflicts.

As in the current geopolitical environment, new treaties or amendments to existing ones are highly unlikely,²⁰ Part III advocates for alternative mechanisms, such as voluntary guidelines for lunar refueling operations, which could offer a viable pathway to a peaceful, safe, and sustainable lunar refueling industry by establishing clear principles, ethical standards, and defined responsibilities. Part III also suggests lunar stakeholders to adopt frameworks of cooperative models, such as shared facilities and network contracts, which would further foster sustainability and facilitate compliance with the OST. Implementing cooperative operations in these forms, in fact, could help address legal issues (for example avoid exclusive or uncoordinated occupation of land) and allow companies to collaborate effectively, adopt common standards and achieve technological advancements. These approaches could align operations of lunar refueling with international space law principles and reduce the risk of conflicts; their implementation could also help address the inevitable environmental challenges arising from the lunar refueling industry and increase its sustainability.

I. In-space and Lunar Refueling Projects; Advantages of Lunar Refueling

A. In-Space Refueling Projects

In-space refueling technology will be established to meet different objectives within Earth’s orbit and on the Moon. Currently, there are numerous projects in development to explore or enable future refueling capabilities in the lunar environment, and even more regarding in Earth’s orbit.²¹ While Earth-orbit refueling²² focuses on extending satellite lifespans and enhancing maneuverability in geostationary orbits, lunar refueling aims to support broader objectives of space exploration, enabling sustainable lunar operations and the development of a cislunar economy, laying the groundwork for deeper exploration of the Solar System.²³

The Lockheed Martin’s white paper envisions lunar refueling facilitating both lunar and interplanetary missions coordinated through a network of orbital bases,²⁴ including NASA’s lunar Gateway station (whose future is now uncertain following the White House’s proposal to cancel it),²⁵ with commercial habitats, a cryogenic propellant refinery, and a depot for lunar-derived materials bound for Earth.²⁶ Serving as an “entry ramp” for an interplanetary highway, this setup enables refueling, cargo transfer, and crew staging for Mars missions.²⁷ The infrastructure supports sustainable lunar and Martian operations, with refueling stations enabling regular missions to Mars and a Martian depot producing propellant from water, thus facilitating further exploration of the Solar System.²⁸

Momentum is building around in-orbit and lunar refueling, despite some challenges,²⁹ and recent U.S. government initiatives further demonstrate this trend. The U.S. Space Force (“USSF”) is cautiously exploring refueling servicing to potentially extend satellite lifespan and improve satellite maneuverability, conducting cost-benefit studies and limited prototype projects before committing to large-scale investments.³⁰ Further, the USSF has cooperated with the U.S. Department of Defense in supporting commercial refueling initiatives such as Orbit Fab’s RAFTI system and GRIP interface, both of which are now approved as standard technologies.³¹ Under the ROOSTER program, USSF also selected Space Logistics’ Active Refueling Module for further development and integration.³² Finally, the USSF’s innovation arm, SpaceWERX, has awarded to CisLunar Industries a contract for creating a sustainable propulsion ecosystem that repurposes metal debris in space as fuel.³³ NASA continues to advance cryogenic fluid handling technologies³⁴ and in 2024 supported an in-flight propellant transfer test on Starship.³⁵

Moreover, several companies are actively developing technologies for propellant production and refueling in orbit and on the Moon. First, Orion Space Solutions is working with USSF on refuellable satellite platforms through the Tetra-5 and Tetra-6 programs, advancing on-orbit refueling capabilities, all specifically intended for operations in geostationary orbit (“GEO”).³⁶ Upon launch, Orion will become the first company to field technologies demonstrating satellite refueling at GEO and to host the full range of commercial refueling mechanisms.³⁷

Secondly, Blue Origin has unveiled the “Blue Ring,” a proposed spacecraft platform with robust refueling capabilities designed to support in-space logistics and delivery for both commercial and government missions from medium Earth orbit to the cislunar region and beyond.³⁸ With NASA’s support, Blue Origin also leads the Blue Alchemist project, an initiative aimed at manufacturing solar cells directly on the Moon using lunar regolith and extracting essential elements like iron, silicon, and aluminum, with oxygen as a byproduct, which can be used for life support and as an oxidizer in rocket propulsion systems.³⁹ Further yet, Blue Origin has unveiled another project focused on propellant production, the “Lunar Polar Propellant Mining Outpost,” which involves deploying landers (e.g., Blue Moon vehicle) to lunar polar regions rich in water-ice and using solar power to extract and process ice into hydrogen and oxygen propellants.⁴⁰

Thirdly, I-space and Orbit Fab (a provider of in-space refueling services) have agreed to collaborate on propellant harvesting and delivery for lunar missions,⁴¹ while recently Orbit Fab has joined forces with Astroport Space Technologies, a company specializing in lunar infrastructure, to accelerate the development of in-situ resource utilization (“ISRU”) systems for extracting and processing lunar regolith into essential resources, including propellants.⁴²

Lastly, in collaboration with NASA, SKYRE and Eta Space are developing an autonomous, commercial Lunar Propellant Production Plant (LP3) to enable lunar refueling, focusing on producing liquid hydrogen and oxygen from lunar resources to support sustainable space exploration.⁴³ Eta Space is advancing several projects focused on the Moon and Mars through local production of essential propellants and consumables – using lunar polar resources like water and sunlight, the Lunar Propellant Production Plant (LPPP) aims to produce, liquefy, and store hydrogen and oxygen propellants to refuel reusable lunar landers, surface transport, and life support equipment. Eta Space is also developing a liquid oxygen refueling station deployable across the lunar surface – the Lunar Oxygen Station (LOS) – for propulsion and life support by converting lunar regolith, deployable across the lunar surface. For this purpose, Eta Space is building ISRU capacity, developing methods like residual scavenging, resource prospecting, and cryogenic liquefaction.⁴⁴

The selected examples above illustrate that numerous projects are underway in the space refueling sector; thus, while lunar refueling remains in its developmental phase, there are multiple pathways through which it could become a reality.

B. Advantages of Lunar Refueling

Both in-Earth-orbit refueling and lunar refueling offer undeniable advantages,⁴⁵ but the list of benefits of the two types of refueling activities differs. In-orbit refueling enhances satellite efficiency and longevity,⁴⁶ improves satellite maneuverability,⁴⁷ provides cost efficiency,⁴⁸ supports other in-space services,⁴⁹ and offers strategic flexibility for military operations.⁵⁰ The ability to refuel spacecrafts locally is essential for deep space exploration, a need that some governments have already recognized.⁵¹ Finally, lunar refueling stations – whether orbiting or ground-based – are poised to play an even more crucial role in the future of space exploration.⁵²

Particularly, lunar refueling offers the following benefits. First, it reduces dependency on Earth for resupply, which is critical for long-duration missions.⁵³ By minimizing the need for spacecraft to carry all their fuel from Earth, lunar refueling alleviates the high launching costs and logistical complexities of Earth-based refueling.⁵⁴ Second, lunar refueling extends mission capabilities and durations.⁵⁵ Instead of being constrained by the finite amount of fuel transported from Earth, spacecrafts can replenish their propellant on the Moon, enabling more prolonged exploration and comprehensive scientific research.⁵⁶ Third, lunar refueling makes it possible to launch from the Moon itself, offering a significant reduction in launch costs.⁵⁷ In fact, lunar launches bypass the need to escape Earth’s strong gravitational pull, benefiting from the Moon’s weaker gravity.⁵⁸

C. The Extraction of Lunar Resources as Integral Part of the Lunar Refueling Industry

The lunar refueling industry is developing procedures to reduce logistical costs by utilizing in-situ resources.⁵⁹ Hydrogen and oxygen derived from lunar water could become the backbone of a sustainable space economy.⁶⁰ The envisioned infrastructure for producing and distributing propellants on the Moon relies on extracting water-ice from lunar craters, converting it into usable fuel, and setting up a logistical network to support missions across the inner Solar System.⁶¹ The process could begin with extracting water from ice deposits in the lunar polar regions,⁶² purifying it and then split it through electrolysis into liquid hydrogen (LH2) and liquid oxygen (LOX),⁶³ which are both fuels prized for their efficiency in chemical propulsion.⁶⁴

The Moon is expected to act as a strategic hub for the rest of the Solar System, housing refueling depots and storage facilities that supply fuel for missions to Mars and beyond.⁶⁵ The refueling network is expected to include “orbital gas stations” where fuel, derived from lunar water, is stored and transported across the inner Solar system.⁶⁶ The infrastructure is expected to include tugs and transport vehicles to move fuel between depots and destinations, supporting long-term interplanetary missions while reducing dependence on Earth-based resources.⁶⁷

Considering the above scenario, lunar refueling will involve far more than just refueling stations; it will require an extensive and complex infrastructure encompassing extraction sites, refineries, pipelines, fuel depots, and maintenance facilities. These components and related activities, categorized as In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing (ISAM), raise some environmental concerns (including those related to extraction sites, pipelines, and depots) and various legal challenges that require analysis. This Paper concentrates on legal issues,⁶⁸ while an analysis of environmental issues is reserved for another day.⁶⁹

II. The Legal Challenges Posed by the OST for Lunar Refueling and the Risk of Conflicts

Several legal issues arise from lunar refueling, the most important of which are with reference to the OST. This Paper argues they are all manageable.

A. Legal issues arising from Article II and Article IX of the OST

1. The potential impact of Article II of the OST on the development of the lunar refueling industry

Article II of the OST bars national appropriation of celestial bodies providing that “[o]uter space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.”⁷⁰ This provision presents two problematic perspectives for the lunar refueling industry: first, the issue of “appropriation” of lunar resources, which would be extracted to produce propellant and other fuels; and second, the occupation of lunar ground necessary for the operations.

First, while “[n]either the OST nor any other of the space treaties that implemented it –with the exception of the unsuccessful Moon Agreement –deal directly with space resource utilization,”⁷¹ the prevailing opinion among space-faring countries is that the use and appropriation of space resources is allowed under the OST.⁷² A few nations have issues laws governing the extraction and use of lunar resources,⁷³ and the majority of scholars agree that the appropriation ban in Article II of the OST does not extend to extracted resources;⁷⁴ this conclusion is based on a variety of reasons, including that Article I of the OST affirms the freedom to explore and utilize space.⁷⁵

Second, lunar refueling will require establishing infrastructure on the Moon’s surface,⁷⁶ which could be seen as an appropriation. Even if such infrastructure, whether temporary or permanent, does not amount to a de jure appropriation, it may well be seen as a de facto appropriation, preventing others from accessing the same area or assert priority over certain locations, even without asserting exclusive ownership,⁷⁷ and thus raising issues with the OST’s non-appropriation principle.

Reference to the provision of Article XII of the OST could be used as a response to these issues because that provision seems to anticipate some level of occupation of land, and hence to legalize it.⁷⁸ In particular, Article XII requires that all facilities on the Moon or other celestial bodies be open to representatives from other Treaty parties, on a reciprocal basis, with advance notice, consultations, and proper safety measures in place.⁷⁹ The provision’s broad language suggests that states can exercise certain rights of control and jurisdiction over their facilities,⁸⁰ while its reference to “normal operations” implies that it encompasses all sorts of infrastructure, including refueling stations and other equipment.⁸¹ Therefore, Article XII could be read to sanction the legitimacy of lunar refueling stations and related facilities, like extraction sites, pipelines, and fuel depots. Since OST parties exercise jurisdiction and control over their facilities, lunar refueling stations fall under the oversight of their respective states, suggesting these installations should be considered legitimate under the OST framework. However, there are qualifications.

While Article XII supports the legitimacy of ISAM facilities, its requirements for advance notice, consultation, and safety measures⁸² emphasize the need for cooperation among lunar stakeholders. Adhering to Article XII’s requirements is beneficial also to mitigate the potential for conflicts on the Moon.⁸³ If these requirements are ignored, perceived appropriation of lunar areas could lead to disputes. This Paper advocates for cooperation among stakeholders – specifically through the adoption of guidelines, shared infrastructure, and potentially network contracts⁸⁴– as a means to mitigate conflicts and ensure adherence to both Article II and Article XII.

In conclusion, this Paper takes the position that not only the use of lunar resources for fuel and propellant production is consistent with the OST, but this is also the case for any occupation of lunar ground with refineries, piping, depots and other refueling facilities;⁸⁵ however, stakeholders’ coordination and cooperation is recommendable under the Treaty.

2. Do the Due Regard and the Avoidance of Harmful Interference Principles Impact Lunar Refueling Activities?

Another clause of the OST that could impact the lunar refueling industry is Article IX,⁸⁶ which establishes three distinct duties in performing space activities: (1) the duty to exercise “due regard” for the activities of others;⁸⁷ (2) the duty to avoid harmful contamination;⁸⁸ and (3) the duty to consult for coordination in cases where harmful interference is anticipated.⁸⁹ This Paper does not address harmful contamination (as this provision is not directly relevant for lunar refueling),⁹⁰ and discusses whether the other two provisions of Article IX could raise insurmountable issues for lunar refueling.

Refueling activities, at any one of their stages, could damage or interference with sister refueling activities or other types of activities (e.g., scientific experiments). Resource extraction, pipeline construction, establishment of fuel depots, and other refueling-related operations, if located near existing operations, could adversely impact them.

Hence, could Article IX pose an obstacle to conducting refueling activities if such activities are likely to hinder other operations? It is unlikely, as the entire Article IX is expressed in broad and ambiguous terms, and state practice does not exist on these provisions.⁹¹ Article IX mandates that contracting states carry out their activities with respect for the actions of others, but what does it mean exactly? The ambiguity of the provision suggests that it cannot be seen as an impediment to conflicting activities.⁹² As for the harmful interference principle, it should be noted that it does not impose a strict obligation to prevent harmful interference or even an explicit duty to coordinate; it only establishes a right to consultation and a duty to consult in cases where potentially harmful interference is anticipated.⁹³

The generality of these provisions makes their application to specific scenarios of lunar refueling operations uncertain. However, for this very reason, it is unlikely that either of the obligations should be interpreted as prohibitive. The placement of a refueling station near other lunar activities – even if it poses operational challenges– does not violate these principles.

At the same time, the inability of these provisions to regulate damages and interferences could cause disputes (and in extreme cases, disruptive confrontations) among stakeholders, including those involved in refueling operations.⁹⁴ This tension calls for cooperation among stakeholders to ensure that refueling services can coexist with other lunar endeavors without causing damage to others, excessive detrimental effects on the lunar environment, or conflicts.⁹⁵

Nonetheless, there remain fundamental legal uncertainties surrounding lunar fueling operation. Imagine an explosion at a cryogenic depot that damages the lunar satellites of another stakeholder. How should the damage to the other party be approached? In the absence of clear precedent this is unclear. Potentially, the damaged party could pursue a state vs. state solution, i.e., seeking to have its state of incorporation to activate various frameworks under international public law.⁹⁶ Alternatively, it could pursue a private vs. private route.⁹⁷ The novelty of lunar industrial activities makes these pathways speculative, underscoring the need for discussion as lunar operations and litigation advance.

B. Potential for Conflicts Among Lunar Stakeholders Including in Connection to Lunar Refueling

Potential conflicts on the Moon may arise for three main reasons. Firstly, a growing number of nations and private entities are advancing lunar projects, leading to the risk of overcrowding and competition. Secondly, prime locations on the Moon are limited, heightening interest in and competition over specific areas. Thirdly, differing interpretations of space law, particularly regarding Article II, contribute to potential disputes.⁹⁸

Some recent studies discuss the potential for conflicts on the Moon because of interference and overcrowding.⁹⁹ Given the significant number of planned lunar projects – of which refueling projects represent only a fraction – conflicts among lunar stakeholders are a real possibility. Areas of interest on the Moon are limited, and upcoming missions are expected to focus on a few specific sites.¹⁰⁰ As on Earth, lunar resources are unevenly distributed, and not all locations are equally suited for every activity.¹⁰¹ Finally, current lunar resource mapping lacks resolution, meaning resource-rich areas might be smaller or more concentrated than estimated.¹⁰²

A couple of examples of prime locations. The Peaks of Eternal Light (“PELs”) near the lunar poles are coveted sites for many activities,¹⁰³ including refueling-related activities. These locations are advantageous for the refueling industry because the abundance of water (which is crucial for fuel production) in the adjacent permanently shadowed regions (PSRs) –which makes the PRSs important for fuel generation, as the ice can be split into hydrogen and oxygen; this renders the PELs also strategic for fuel production: PELs, offering near-continuous sunlight, offer stable solar power, which can be used to supports solar-powered infrastructure for extracting and splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen through electrolysis in PSRs,¹⁰⁴ as has already been recognized for planning purposes by many future lunar stakeholders.¹⁰⁵ Competition and interferences can easily ensue in these areas.

The Far Side of the Moon is also regarded as a prime site for many activities.¹⁰⁶ Smooth terrains there provide ideal sites for radio-quiet zones and cosmological telescopes, but only six areas (such as Mare Moscoviensis and Mendeleev) offer the necessary extensive terrain.¹⁰⁷ These same areas also contain high concentrations of helium-3, a potential fuel for nuclear fusion.¹⁰⁸ However, this dual appeal is problematic, as mining and astronomical activities often conflict, increasing the likelihood of disputes.¹⁰⁹

Sinus Medii is the prime candidate for positioning a lunar elevator to the Earth–Moon Lagrange L1 point (“L1”), as well as for installing an antenna to receive microwave power from a potential solar power station at L1.¹¹⁰ Lipskiy Crater is an ideal location for situating a lunar elevator to the Earth–Moon L2 point.¹¹¹ Given their strategic locations, it is likely that many entities, including lunar refueling companies, will seek to utilize these two areas. For example, both offer convenient access for connecting with cryogenic propellant refineries and depots to be positioned in stable orbits around the Moon.¹¹²

With multiple stakeholders targeting these limited, high-value areas for a number of purposes, congestion, interference, and resource disputes seem almost inevitable.¹¹³ Refueling will be part of the congestion and could create interferences. For example, the extraction of helium3 – which could be used for fusion-based spacecraft propulsion,¹¹⁴ and is present in high density only in a few regions–¹¹⁵ can interfere with planned scientific infrastructures, such as telescopes, because it can affect sensitive equipment.¹¹⁶

In addition, there are potential environmental issues associated with mining, including for fuel production. For instance, extracting certain resources found in specific lunar areas (such as thorium, uranium, and particularly helium-3) carries pollution risks,¹¹⁷ either from dust or byproducts. This activity may also lead to conflicts.

The mere occupation of lunar ground for extractions sites (which will be extensive),¹¹⁸ pipelines, fuel depots, and other facilities could by itself lead to conflicts with other lunar stakeholders. Indeed, such installations may be viewed – as discussed¹¹⁹ – as a de facto appropriation of lunar ground, as they may restrict other stakeholders’ access to the same areas, even without a formal claim of exclusive ownership.¹²⁰ The construction of these facilities can cause tensions that might even culminate in violence or armed conflicts.¹²¹

The solutions proposed in Part III – cooperation, guidelines, shared facilities, and lunar network contracts – could constitute effective measures to reduce the conflicts described above. To be clear, these proposals differ fundamentally from the regime envisioned under the Moon Agreement.¹²² While the Moon Agreement calls for a centralized international authority and a redistributive “common heritage” framework,¹²³ the mechanisms proposed in Part III are voluntary, industry-driven, and grounded in mutual economic benefits; they are intended to foster practical cooperation rather than impose centralized governance. They do not require global consensus or legally binding international commitments, but can be implemented pragmatically through stakeholder collaboration, incentivized by national licensing regimes, market efficiency, and contractual arrangements.

III. Proposed Solutions

A. Guidelines for the Lunar Refueling Industry

As the complexities of lunar operations may call for a framework to promote responsible activity and common practices by stakeholders, this paper suggests adoption of voluntary guidelines. Given the discussed improbability of creating new treaties or modifying existing ones in the near term,¹²⁴ developing comprehensive guidelines appears to be the best approach to foster safe, sustainable, and ideally conflict-free activities.¹²⁵ The ISAM Implementation Plan indirectly acknowledges this need, encouraging international cooperation on guidelines and norms.¹²⁶ These guidelines should outline explicit rules, incorporate ethical standards, and set expectations for lunar stakeholders, addressing legal uncertainties. Envisioned as a non-binding set of principles, these guidelines could be voluntarily adopted or recommended by industry associations such as the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA),¹²⁷ the Commercial Spaceflight Federation,¹²⁸ or national coalitions like the Consortium for Space Mobility and ISAM Capabilities (COSMIC),¹²⁹ which is spearheading efforts to make ISAM a routine part of space architectures. They could also be integrated into domestic laws in various countries. Rather than a rigid code of conduct, these guidelines would offer flexible recommendations and best practices. The Artemis Accords,¹³⁰ along with select elements from the Building Blocks¹³¹ that emphasize stakeholder cooperation and transparency, could inform the development of these lunar refueling guidelines, which should be flexible to accommodate changes as activities evolve.

B. Cooperative Models

With the emergence of a lunar economy, addressing the legal and factual challenges discussed above is crucial to ensure the viability of lunar refueling activities and their sustainability – meaning the ability to continue them indefinitely¹³² – and to support expansion of lunar commercial activity, including refueling.¹³³ This Paper suggests that cooperation among lunar refueling stakeholders is crucial to address legal uncertainties and reduce the likelihood of conflicts.

The ISAM Strategy emphasizes the importance of coordination among stakeholders,¹³⁴ as does the ISAM Implementation Plan.¹³⁵ Section 4.1 of the ISAM Implementation Plan highlights the role of international cooperation in developing guidelines and best practices for responsible space activities,¹³⁶ while Section 4.5 promotes international collaboration that aligns with U.S. laws, regulations, and policies.¹³⁷ Additionally, Section 4.6 suggests exploring arrangements for appropriate access to testing facilities on Earth and in space.¹³⁸ To be clear, while this Paper does not propose that the guidelines be adopted by international organizations or their committees –such as COPUOS (the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space)¹³⁹ – as doing so would likely require a consensus that is difficult to achieve in the near term, the guidelines should remain open to collaboration or adoption by industry associations, foreign companies and any type of lunar stakeholders; broad participation beyond domestic actors should be encouraged.

1. Shared Refueling Facilities and Resource Pooling

In light of the need for cooperation among stakeholders to establish refueling stations that are both efficient and sustainable, collaboration could take the form of shared lunar facilities or pooled resources, both of which offer practical approaches. Consistent with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) 10-Year Lunar Architecture Capability Study’s (LunA-10) emphasis on reducing the lunar footprint and creating scalable, interoperable systems rather than isolated missions,¹⁴⁰ this Paper advocates for a shared infrastructure model in which refueling companies share facilities (e.g., extraction facilities) to reduce the high costs associated with individual operations but also to prevent competition for prime locations among stakeholders.¹⁴¹ Finally, while this Paper does not delve into the environmental risks of the lunar refueling industry, it offers a limited observation that shared facilities may help reduce surface disruption,¹⁴² by reducing the number of potentially disruptive facilities on the lunar surface.

The concept of shared production facilities has been recognized as efficient and economically advantageous over the ages in cultures as diverse as ancient Greece (Communal bread ovens) and Renaissance Europe (shared workshops),¹⁴³ modern Israel (kibbutzim),¹⁴⁴ the United States (shared warehouses),¹⁴⁵ and contemporary Italy (oil mills).¹⁴⁶ Scholars argue that shared production facilities optimize resources, improve market access, and foster collaboration among entities.¹⁴⁷ Applying this shared infrastructure model to lunar refueling industry, stakeholders could benefit from centralized extraction sites, common pipelines, shared propellant depot, and collaborative maintenance hubs. Economically, shared lunar refueling facilities would reduce costs for stakeholders by distributing the burden of constructing and maintaining independent facilities. They could also foster international cooperation, avoid monopolization of lunar resources, and encourage peaceful collaboration. Such facilities could promote sustainable lunar development while mitigating risks associated with individual installations, like accidental damage to heritage sites.¹⁴⁸

Cooperation among refueling service providers could extend to pooling resources and capacities, i.e., combining the capabilities of multiple facilities through shared inventory.¹⁴⁹ Terrestrial industries with high resource demands and costly downtimes, such as aviation, are exploring resource pooling. ¹⁵⁰ On the Moon, resource pooling can both address potential supply shortages in lunar operations – where isolated facilities might face critical deficits in fuel, spare parts, or equipment – and can also offer environmental benefits, as it may reduce the frequency of rocket launches, excavation, and transport, decrease emissions and energy consumption, and mitigate the risk of generating space debris by lowering the number of landings.

How can we achieve the goal of lunar stakeholders using shared facilities or pooling resource together? One promising approach is to integrate these requirements into the licensing framework for lunar activities. Currently, the United States lacks a licensing system for lunar activities.¹⁵¹ In establishing one, the United States could consider using the licensing procedure to encourage these arrangements. An alternative, a voluntary-based method to encourage this structure would be to offer incentives such as tax breaks or regulatory preferences, enabling the government to promote shared infrastructures and resource pooling. Finally, space associations can help catalyze the broader adoption of shared facilities and pooled-resource frameworks through strategic coordination and sustained engagement with their members.¹⁵²

2. Network Contracts

“Network contracts” (contratto di rete), established under Italian law, provide a flexible framework for collaborative operations by independent companies within a coordinated network.¹⁵³ Designed to facilitate production and distribution among business districts, these contracts enable companies to benefit from economies of scale and respond to globalization’s demands.¹⁵⁴ Networks can take various forms – organizational, contractual, or mixed –¹⁵⁵ depending on their structure and include elements like strategic objectives, decision-making processes,¹⁵⁶ and, optionally, a common fund and a dispute resolution body.¹⁵⁷ Central to a network is the so-called “network program” (programma di rete), which outlines the participants’ rights and obligations, as well as the methods for pursuing the common purpose.¹⁵⁸

Network contracts could prove highly beneficial for lunar refueling operations, fostering collaboration, resource sharing, and flexible adaptation to evolving conditions on the Moon. Similar to the Italian model, lunar networks could consist of independent entities in the lunar refueling industry bound by a network program detailing objectives, rights, and obligations specific to refueling activities. Lunar stakeholders could structure these networks as consortia, joint ventures, or other agreements based on their preferences.

These networks could serve to implement shared refueling stations, where participating companies could pool expertise, resources, and testing capabilities, reducing costs and supporting efficient lunar refueling activities. The benefits of lunar networks may include: (1) collective expertise and resource sharing; (2) enhanced compliance with OST provisions; (3) improved coordination of resources; (4) reduction of environmental impact and of risks for lunar heritage sites; (5) sustainability.

Similarly to shared facilities, the adoption of a network contract could either be mandated or encouraged. Mandating could involve embedding it within the licensing framework for lunar refueling services, making network participation a licensing requirement. Encouraging could mean incentivizing it through regulatory or tax benefits. Alternatively, network contracts could be incorporated into arrangements like the Artemis Accords to promote uniform standards among participants. Industry associations, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce or the space associations mentioned above,¹⁵⁹ could further support the adoption of network contracts by highlighting their advantages to their members and encouraging industry-wide compliance.

Conclusion

As humanity establishes a permanent presence on the Moon, lunar refueling will become increasingly important, with the potential to transform the Moon into a strategic gateway for deep-space exploration, paving the way for missions to Mars, the asteroids, and beyond. This Paper has discussed certain legal issues arising from the OST and concluded that they are manageable. It has also considered how lunar refueling, like other ISAM activities on the Moon, could stir up conflicts among stakeholders. To address the legal concerns and mitigate potential conflicts, the Paper proposes solutions based on cooperation and coordination among the stakeholders, as well as the development of industry-driven guidelines. These solutions may not satisfy those who maintain a strong belief that formal international agreements remain a viable and necessary path forward. This Paper rejects that view. In the current geopolitical environment, the negotiation of new treaties or amendments to existing ones appears increasingly unlikely. Accordingly, the proposed mechanisms (voluntary guidelines, cooperative models, and network contracts) offer a pragmatic, industry-driven, adaptable approach grounded in mutual benefits and stakeholder initiative, with the added potential to reduce environmental impact by promoting resource sharing and minimizing redundant infrastructure. The uncertainties surrounding lunar activities demand solutions that can be implemented in the near term, as commercial operations are beginning to take shape. This Paper has outlined potential solutions grounded in cooperation, adaptability, and stakeholder initiative.

* Francesca Giannoni-Crystal is an international lawyer practicing with Crystal & Giannoni-Crystal LLC, with two JDs (University of Florence, Italy and Charleston School of Law) and an LLM in Space Law (summa cum laude) from the University of Mississippi School of Law. She assists companies in several industries including aerospace and defense. She wants to thank Matt Blaszczyk, managing editor of the Journal of Law and Mobility for his helpful comments, Italian attorney Eva Bredariol, who inspired the idea of the network contracts for the Moon, and her law partner Prof. Nathan M. Crystal, whose support and encouragement make her scholarship possible.