NASA's draft RFP keeps full and open competition for Phase 2 and positions the agency as one customer among many, betting commercial capital can carry human presence after the ISS retires.
NASA released a draft Request for Proposals on Monday for the second phase of its commercial space stations program. The structure of that RFP is the news. NASA reaffirmed traditional federal contracts awarded through full-and-open competition, the same model it used for Phase 1 and the one industry asked it to keep.
That choice keeps NASA in a buyer role rather than a builder role. It also leaves the financing of the next generation of orbital outposts to a commercial marketplace the agency is simultaneously trying to create.
"NASA's review reflects what we've been hearing from industry throughout this process," Administrator Jared Isaacman said in the agency's announcement. "Industry believes it can meet the timelines and that a viable commercial marketplace exists where NASA is one customer among many."
The draft RFP is the second step in a two-solicitation process. The first was a Request for Information released March 25, 2026, which surveyed industry on capital readiness, market size, and acquisition structure. According to the NASA release, respondents reported significant capital investment behind the FAR-based, full-and-open approach, and high confidence in attracting additional capital and expanding future market opportunities. NASA responded by reaffirming its original plan.
The alternative would have been some form of guaranteed anchor tenancy or sole-source award, structures that de-risk the provider at the cost of locking in the agency as the indispensable customer. NASA declined that path.
The distinction between an anchor tenant and a buyer of services is who carries the demand risk. In an anchor model, the government's commitment backstops the financing of the facility. In a buyer model, the government purchases services as it needs them at market-clearing prices, and the provider is responsible for filling the rest of the capacity with non-NASA customers.
Phase 1 of NASA's commercial LEO development program already had this shape. Phase 2 deepens it. The draft RFP asks industry how NASA can "support the development of a robust commercial marketplace" while remaining "one of many customers."
Wire coverage will frame this as NASA planning for post-ISS commercial stations. The mechanism underneath is sharper: NASA is choosing, deliberately, not to be the customer that anchors the post-ISS market. If commercial demand does not grow, the stations do not get built or do not stay built. NASA has signaled it will not be the customer that closes the gap.
Staying inside the FAR-based, full-and-open framework is what makes that posture possible. The moment the agency moves to a sole-source or guaranteed-tenancy structure, it commits to being the customer of last resort.
The draft RFP is open for industry comment before NASA finalizes the formal solicitation, which means the acquisition structure could still shift in response. The draft also does not yet specify the size of the services NASA intends to buy, how many providers it expects to fund, or how it will manage the gap between ISS retirement and the first commercial station reaching operational capability.
Those are the questions that determine whether the buyer-not-builder bet holds. NASA's current stance, on the record, is that it does not intend to be the customer that makes the post-ISS market work. Industry told the agency it does not need to be. The draft RFP asks the broader industry base to confirm it.