[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 78 (Thursday, April 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20240-20243]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-10748]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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