23 April 1998 Source: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aaces002.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Federal Register: April 23, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 78)] [Notices] [Page 20240-20243] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr23ap98-127] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration [Docket No. 29208] Proposed Finding of No Significant Impact AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Proposed finding of no significant impact; Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The FAA prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA), evaluating a Sea Launch Limited [[Page 20241]] Partnership (SLLP) proposal to construct and operate a mobile, floating launch platform in international waters in the east-central equatorial Pacific Ocean. After reviewing and analyzing currently available data and information on existing conditions, project impacts, and measures to mitigate those impacts, the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA), Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation (AST) proposes to determine that licensing the operation of the proposed launch activities is not a major Federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would not be required and AST is proposing to issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). FOR A COPY OF THE SEA LAUNCH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CONTACT: Mr. Nikos Himaras, FAA, Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation, Suite 331/AST-100, 800 Independence Ave., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20591; phone (202) 267-7926, or refer to the following Internet address: http://ast.faa.gov DATES: There will be a thirty (30) day comment period before the FAA makes its final determination on the proposed FONSI. Interested individuals, Government agencies, and private organizations are invited to send comments on the proposed FONSI to the address set forth below by May 26, 1998 by mail. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to, Docket Clerk, Docket No. 29208, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave., S.W., Room 915, Washington, D.C. 20591. Proposed Action If a foreign entity controlled by a U.S. citizen conducts a launch outside the United States and outside the territory of a foreign country, its launch must be licensed. 49 U.S.C. 70104(a)(3). The FAA determined that SLLP is a foreign entity controlled by a U. S. Citizen, Boeing Commercial Space Company. 49 U.S.C. 70102(1)(C); 14 CFR 401.5. Because it proposes to launch in international waters, outside the territory of the United States or a foreign country, SLLP must obtain an FAA license to launch. Licensing a launch is a Federal action requiring environmental analysis by the FAA in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. Upon receipt of a completed application, the Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation must determine whether or not to issue a license to SLLP to launch. Environmental findings are required for a license evaluation. In this instance, the proposed action is the licensing by the FAA of all possible launches by the SLLP at the specified launch location. SLLP proposes to conduct commercial space launch operations from a mobile, floating platform in international waters in the east-central equatorial Pacific Ocean. The SLLP is an international commercial venture formed to launch commercial satellites. It is organized under the laws of the Cayman Islands, BWI, and the partnership members are Boeing Commercial Space Company of the United States, RSC Energia of Russia, KB Yuzhnoye of the Ukraine, and Kvaerner Maritime a.s. of Norway. The SLLP would use a launch platform (LP) and an assembly and command ship (ACS). A floating oil drilling platform is being refurbished in Norway to serve as the self-propelled LP. The ACS is being built in Scotland specifically for Sea Launch operations. A Zenith-3 SL expendable launch vehicle fueled by Kerosene and liquid oxygen would be the only launch vehicle used at the Sea Launch facilities. In the first year of operation, SLLP intends to conduct two launches. Six launches are proposed for each subsequent year. The launches are proposed to occur at the equator in the vicinity of 154 degrees west to maximize inertial and other launch efficiencies. The distances from South America (over 7,000 km) and from the nearest inhabited island (340 km) are intended to ensure that stage one and stage two would drop well away from land and coastal populated areas. The FAA evaluated open sea areas, the Kiribati Islands, the Galapagos Islands and the Home Port in Long Beach, California for environmental impacts from the proposed launch activities. The environmental study focused on Sea Launch activities conducted at the launch location, activities that may impact the launch range during nominal launches, and failed missions. Sea Launch payloads (i.e., commercial satellites) are not included in this evaluation because they will be fueled and sealed at the Home Port and will only become operational at an altitude of 35,000 km. The environmental study incorporates by reference an environmental assessment conducted by the Navy on the Home Port Facility which resulted in 1996 in a Finding of No Significant Impact. Potential environmental impacts of payloads are not discussed here except with regard to failed mission scenarios. Environmental Impacts Air Quality Pre-launch activities that may impact air quality include LP and ACS positioning, final equipment and process checks, coupling of fuel lines to the integrated launch vehicle (ILV) prior to fueling, the transfer of kerosene and liquid oxygen (LOX) fuels, and decoupling of the fueling apparatus. Normal operations would result only in an incidental loss of kerosene and LOX. This loss of vapors would dissipate immediately and form smog. An unsuccessful ignition attempt would result in automatic defueling of the ILV. Defueling would release LOX vapor and approximately 70 kg of kerosene when the fuel line is flushed. The LOX would dissipate and the vapor and kerosene would evaporate, dissipate rapidly and degrade, thereby having little effect on the surrounding environment. Potential environmental impacts from launch activities would include spent stages, residual fuels and combustion emissions released into the atmosphere and ocean from spent stages, combustion emissions, thermal energy and noise. During nominal launches, any impacts would be distributed across the east-central equatorial pacific region in a predictable manner. Kerosene released during descent of a failed launch attempt would evaporate within minutes. Any residual liquid oxygen would instantly evaporate without consequence. The proposed launch location is relatively free of combustion source emissions. That fact coupled with the size of the Pacific Ocean and air space allows most launch emissions to dissipate rapidly. Launch effects on the boundary layer up to two thousand meters would be short term and cause minimal impacts. Emissions occurring in the boundary layer would be dispersed away from inhabited islands by prevailing easterly trade winds and local turbulence caused by solar heating. Because dispersion occurs within hours, the planned six missions per year would preclude any chance of cumulative effects. All emissions to the troposphere would come from first stage combustion of LOX and kerosene. Photochemical reactions involving Sea Launch Zenit rocket emissions would form carbon dioxide (CO2) and oxygenated organic compounds. Nitrogen oxide in the exhaust trail would form nitric and nitrous acids. Cloud droplets and atmospheric aerosols efficiently absorb [[Page 20242]] water-soluble compounds such as acids, oxygenated chemical compounds, and oxidants, thereby reducing impacts to insignificant levels. Approximately 36,100 kg of carbon monoxide (CO) would be released into the troposphere during the first 55 seconds of flight resulting in an estimated CO concentration at Christmas Island of 9.94 mg/m3. This release is well below the Occupational Safety and Health Administration Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 55 mg/m3, the Environmental Protection Agency level of concern of 175 mg/m3 and the industry Emergency Response Planning Guideline-2 of 400 mg/m3. Nitrogen compounds in the exhaust trail of liquid propellant rockets would cause a temporary reduction of ozone, with return to near background levels within a few hours. Models and measurement of other space systems comparable to Sea Launch indicate that these impacts would be temporary, and the atmosphere is capable of replacing by migration or regeneration the destroyed ozone within a few hours. The high-speed movement of the Zenit-3L rocket and the re-entry of the stages after their use may impact stratospheric ozone. The exact chemistry and relative significance of these processes are not known but are believed to be minimal. Impacts to air quality would be minimal. Those impacts that do occur would be of short duration and would naturally reverse themselves over a short period of time. Waste Post-launch operations involve cleaning the launch platform for subsequent launches. Cleaning would result in particulate residues being washed from the LP with fresh water. Only a few kilograms of debris and residues would be generated. These materials would be collected and handled onboard as solid waste for later disposal at the Home Port. Noise Noise from a launch is calculated at approximately 150 decibels at 378 meters with the equivalent sound intensity in the water estimated at less than 75 decibels. Due to the small number of launches per year and scarcity of higher trophic level organisms, noise impacts are expected to be negligible. Biological and Ecological Impacts Pre-launch preparations include spraying fresh water from a tank on the LP into the LP's flame bucket, which would dissipate heat and absorb sound during the initial fuel burn. There would be minor impacts to the ecosystem because of the input of heated freshwater. However, the natural variation in plankton densities would ensure rapid and timely recolonization of plankton in the water surrounding the LP. Launch and flight activities may impact the ocean environment by depositing spent stages and residual fuels. During nominal launches, these impacts would occur and be distributed across the east-central equatorial pacific region. It is unlikely that any falling debris would impact animals, although a small number of marine organisms would be impacted. Kerosene reaching the ocean would form a surface sheen covering several square kilometers. Over 95% of the kerosene sheen would evaporate from surface waters within hours with the remaining 5% dispersing or degrading in a few days. Plankton immediately beneath the kerosene slick would likely be killed. However, overall plankton mortality would be minimal as the population densities are greatest around 30 meters below the surface. Two worst case scenarios were evaluated and determined to cause only minimal damage to the environment. The first case evaluated ILV failure and explosion on the LP with the ILV being fully fueled and ready for launch. This failure would result in an explosion of the ILV fuels scattering pieces of the LLV and LP up to 3 km away. Particulate matter from the smoke plume would drift downwind and be distributed a few kilometers before dissipating. Plankton and fish in the immediate area would be killed over the course of several days. Thermal energy would be deflected and absorbed by the ocean and 100% of the fuels would be consumed or released into the atmosphere through combustion or evaporation. Disruption to the atmosphere and the ocean would be assimilated and the environment would return to pre-accident conditions within several days. The second scenario evaluated involved failure of the rocket's upper stage. Loss and re-entry of the upper stage and payload would result in materials and fuels being heated by friction and vaporizing. Remaining objects would fall into the ocean causing a temporary disruption as the warm objects cooled and sank. The risk of debris striking any populated areas or ecological habitats is very remote. Socioeconomics The SLLP launch activities would occupy the launch location for two to seven days during each launch cycle. Due to the brief period of time that the LP and the ACS will be present at the launch location, social and economic impacts to the Kiribati are considered negligible. The brief duration of launch activities, and the relative degree of isolation of the launch location provides a barrier between Sea Launch and the cultural and economic character of the Kiribati society. The baseline plan for operations does not include any use of facilities based on any of the Kiribati Islands. Impacts to the Islands, associated with employees transiting Christmas Island on an emergency basis, would be positive given that the expenditures would be an addition to the local economy. Health and Safety The FAA's licensing process will examine all safety-related aspects of the proposed launch operations. The SLLP adopted a common risk value, an upper limit of one in a million casualty expectations, as the population protection criteria. Public Safety assurance and analysis issues are discussed in the SLLP document ``Sea Launch System Safety Plan''. The launch location was shifted away from South America to ensure that stage one, the fairing, and stage two would drop well away from land and coastal commercial activity. The instantaneous impact point speed would increase over South America, decreasing the dwell time and potential risk as the rocket traverses land. The launch area, in the vicinity of 154 degrees west, was selected because it is located outside of the Kiribati 320 km exclusive economic zone and is roughly 340 km from the nearest inhabited island. The licensing process will evaluate these factors. Threatened and Endangered Species There are no known threatened and endangered species that will be impacted by the proposed launch activities. Archeological and Cultural Resources The launch activities, proposed to occur in the open ocean, will not impact archeological or cultural resources. Cumulative Impacts There are no other foreseeable planned developments in the area of the proposed launch location at this time; therefore, no cumulative impacts are expected. The Navy Mole facility is currently underutilized as compared to its historical level of operation and development. The Home Port facility may be the impetus for other development in the area. [[Page 20243]] Other Environmental Considerations Home Port The design, permitting, construction, and operation of the Home port would be managed under the jurisdiction of the state, regional, county, municipal, and port authorities of the Port of Long Beach, California. The Navy, as part of the California Environmental Quality Act Process, submitted the Mole EA to the California Coastal Commission for review, which determined the proposed Home Port activities were not inconsistent with the California Coastal Zone Management Program. The Port of Long Beach has approved the construction and operation of the Home Port through the Harbor Development Permit process. One of the standard conditions in the Harbor Development Permit is that SLLP will follow all applicable Federal, state, and local laws and regulations, including those pertaining to safety and the environment. No Action Alternative Under the No Action alternative the SLLP would not launch satellites from the Pacific Ocean and the Port of Long Beach would remain available for other commercial or government ventures. The goals of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle IX, ch. 701 Commercial Space Launch Activities, would not be realized. Predicted environmental impacts of the proposed launch activities would not occur and the project area would remain in its current state. Determination An analysis of the proposed action has concluded that there are no significant short-term or long-term effects to the environment or surrounding populations. After careful and thorough consideration of the facts contained herein, the undersigned finds that the proposed Federal action is consistent with existing national environmental policies and objectives as set forth in section 101(a) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and that it will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment or otherwise include any condition requiring consultation pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of NEPA. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed action would not be required. Issued in Washington, DC on April 17, 1998. Manuel F. Vega, Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation. [FR Doc. 98-10748 Filed 4-22-98; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P