On June 17, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) released its Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) recommending the issuance of a rocket launch site operator’s license to Camden County. The last step in the process is for the FAA to release a Record of Decision (ROD) expected sometime this month. The Center sent the following letter condemning fundamental flaws in the environmental review that the FAA should correct by conducting a Supplemental EIS before making a decision. You can read the entire EIS online at the FAA's website.
General Wayne Monteith, FAA Administrator
Associate Administrator FAA/AST
800 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC 20591
General Monteith:
I am writing to restate and expand upon concerns previously conveyed in our comments, and others, expressing well-justified alarm about glaring deficiencies in FAA’s review of Spaceport Camden.
For the sake of brevity, in these comments, I will limit remarks to four prominent areas of factual negligence and faulty assumptions related to the EIS that are both careless and misleading.
1. Launch trajectory and hypothetical rocket characteristics – According to the most qualified opinions available, the launch trajectory proposed is implausible if not impossible to deliver payload in achieving a viable orbital mission. It appears that the manipulated launch-angle used in the EIS, and consequentially applied in the state’s consistency review, was improperly assumed for the convenience of attempting to reduce the hazard-zone for a launch failure during the initial stages immediately after launch. The misguided nature of this proposal is revealed by the absence of any precedent for small rockets using such an angle of trajectory to support the attainment of an orbital mission. Please clarify if and when such a small-rocket orbital launch has ever been done successfully, or if the notion is just theoretical conjecture.
Regarding the small size of the hypothetical rocket, why does the EIS describe storage at the site for what amounts to some 28 years of small-rocket fuel supply? This strongly suggests the hidden intention to transition to the use of larger rockets that require far more fuel, once licensing is obtained for a site approved based on a fantasized small rocket allegedly having smaller risks.
...continue reading "Letter to FAA Outlining Defects in Review of Spaceport Camden"