Federal Agencies Under Fire for Environmental Reviews of SpaceX Starship Launches

Defense News - Numerous organizations have recently lodged a fresh complaint regarding the environmental ramifications associated with SpaceX Starship launches. This comes amidst growing criticism directed at government agencies for both delaying these launches to conduct environmental reviews and allegedly neglecting comprehensive assessments.

On December 15, a coalition of environmental groups declared that they had submitted an additional legal claim in federal court concerning the licensing of Starship launches from SpaceX Starbase facility near Brownsville, Texas. This move follows their initial lawsuit against the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in May, initiated shortly after the inaugural Starship launch on April 20.

In the supplementary complaint, filed by entities including the Center for Biological Diversity, American Bird Conservancy, Carrizo/Comecrudo Nation of Texas, Inc., Save RGV, and Surfrider Foundation, it is asserted that the FAA failed to adequately evaluate the environmental impact of the first Starship launch. The complaint contends that the FAA issued a revised license for the second launch on November 18 without proper scrutiny.

As part of the new licensing process, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) conducted an environmental review concerning a pad deluge system installed by SpaceX to prevent damage similar to what occurred during the initial launch. The FWS concluded that this system would not cause significant environmental changes.

The environmental groups argue that both the FAA and FWS fell short of their obligations under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in reviewing the environmental impacts of Starship launches. The complaint emphasizes that the FAA failed to take a comprehensive look at the impacts of the Starship/Superheavy launch program through a supplemental NEPA analysis.

Jared Margolis, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, expressed concern, stating, "Failing to do an in-depth environmental review and letting SpaceX keep launching the world largest rockets that repeatedly explode shows a shocking disregard for wildlife and communities. SpaceX should not be given free rein to use this amazing area as a sacrifice zone."

While environmental groups criticize the government for what they perceive as insufficient measures to protect the environment from Starship launches, some argue that regulatory agencies are imposing undue delays. Senator Ted Cruz, at a December 13 hearing, claimed that the second Starship launch experienced months of delay due to bureaucratic red tape from various agencies.

Kelvin Coleman, FAA associate administrator for commercial space transportation, defended the environmental review process, stating it was necessary to ensure compliance with NEPA and related environmental laws. However, Senator Cruz argued that these reviews resulted in unreasonable delays, hindering the United States competitiveness in spaceflight compared to other nations.

NASA Deputy Administrator Pam Melroy, also present at the hearing, highlighted discussions with environmental regulatory agencies to emphasize the significance of activities like Starship. NASA has invested $4 billion in contracts with SpaceX for the development of a lunar lander version of Starship for the Artemis lunar exploration program.

The FAA is currently overseeing a SpaceX-led investigation into the second Starship launch on November 18, where both the Super Heavy booster and Starship upper stage were destroyed. The investigation is progressing concurrently with the application for a license modification needed for the third Starship test flight. While no timeline has been set for completing the investigation, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has expressed optimism about a potential launch by the end of the year, contingent upon the investigation conclusion and the issuance of a modified launch license.