Jump to main content.

Office of Commercial Space Transportation; Notice of Availability and Request for Comment on a Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Oklahoma Spaceport

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 [Federal Register: February 3, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 23)]
[Notices]
[Page 5901-5902]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03fe06-124]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
 
Office of Commercial Space Transportation; Notice of Availability 
and Request for Comment on a Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) for 
the Oklahoma Spaceport

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Office of Commercial 
Space Transportation (AST) is the lead Federal agency for the 
development of this EA. The U.S. Air Force (USAF) is a cooperating 
agency for the development of this EA.
ACTION: Notice of Availability and Request for Comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
regulations, the FAA is announcing the availability of and requesting 
comments on the Draft EA for the Oklahoma Spaceport. On October 23, 
2002, the FAA published a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental 
Impact Statement for the Oklahoma Space Industry Development 
Authority's (OSIDA) proposal to operate a commercial launch facility at 
the Clinton-Sherman Industrial Airpark (CSIA) located in Burns Flat, 
Oklahoma. After substantial changes to the proposed action, the FAA 
reconsidered the scope of the analysis required to support the proposed 
action and alternatives and determined that an EA would more 
appropriately address the environmental consequences of the proposed 
action and alternatives. On October 7, 2005, the FAA issued a notice in 
the Federal Register announcing that the proposed action would be 
addressed in an EA.
    Under the proposed action, the FAA would issue a launch site 
operator license to OSIDA to operate a launch facility at the CSIA and 
approve the land transfer of the CSIA from the city of Clinton to 
OSIDA. The EA evaluates potential impacts to the environment from 
launches and landings of three types of suborbital horizontally 
launched reusable launch vehicles (RLVs) \1\ from the CSIA. The FAA may 
use the analysis in the EA as the basis for making a determination to 
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement or a Finding of No 
Significant Impact regarding the issuance of a launch site operator 
license as well as the licensing or permitting of the launch of certain 
types of launch vehicles, and the transfer of ownership of the CSIA 
from the City of Clinton to OSIDA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ RLVs are launch vehicles that have stages or components that 
can return to Earth and be recovered or reused. A suborbital rocket 
is a vehicle, rocket-propelled in whole or in part, intended for 
flight on a suborbital trajectory, and the thrust of which is 
greater than its lift for the majority of the rocket-powered portion 
of its ascent. (49 U.S.C. 70102(19))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA is the lead Federal agency for the NEPA process and the 
USAF is a cooperating agency on this proposed action. The USAF is the 
primary user of the CSIA for aircrew training including landing and 
departures. In addition, the USAF's current and as yet undefined future 
activities could be impacted by the use of the CSIA as a launch site. 
Therefore, the FAA requested and the USAF agreed to participate as a 
cooperating agency in the preparation of the EA.

DATES: The public comment period for the NEPA process begins with the 
publication of this notice in the Federal Register. To ensure that all 
comments can be addressed in the Final EA, comments must be received by 
the FAA no later than March 13, 2006. The Draft EA is available for 
download at http://ast.faa.gov Exit Disclaimer and at 
http://www.okspaceporteis.com. Exit Disclaimer A hard copy of the Draft EA 
can also be viewed at the following locations:
Clinton Public Library, Clinton, Oklahoma;
Elk City Carnegie Library, Elk City, Oklahoma;
Oklahoma City Public Library, Downtown Branch, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; 
and
South Western Oklahoma Development Authority, Burns Flat, Oklahoma.

A public hearing will be held at 7:30 p.m., Thursday, March 9, 2006 at 
the South Western Oklahoma Development Authority, Western Technology 
Center located in Burns Flat, Oklahoma. For more information about this 
project, please visit http://www.okspaceporteis.com. Exit Disclaimer

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Comments, statements, or questions 
concerning the Draft EA should be mailed to Mr. Doug Graham, FAA 
Environmental Specialist, FAA Oklahoma Spaceport EA, c/o ICF 
Consulting, 9300 Lee Highway, Fairfax, VA 22031. Comments can also be 
to (703) 934-3951.
    Additional Information: Under the proposed action, the FAA would 
issue a launch site operator license to OSIDA for the operation of a 
launch facility at the CSIA and approve the land transfer of the CSIA. 
OSIDA has identified three types of launch vehicles, identified in the 
EA as Concept X, Y, and Z, which are typical of the vehicles that would 
operate from the CSIA. The proposed action includes launches and 
landings of all three types of Concept launch vehicles. No construction 
activities are proposed as part of the proposed action. Existing 
infrastructure including buildings, hangars, and runways would be used 
to support proposed launch and landing operations at the site. The 
potential users of the site would be responsible for obtaining any 
necessary permits or approvals including a launch

[[Page 5902]]

license from the FAA for specific missions.
    Concept X launch vehicles would use jet-powered take off with 
subsequent rocket ignition, and conduct powered horizontal landing. 
These launch vehicles would take off from conventional runways using 
jet power, and then ignite rocket engines at a specified altitude. The 
launch vehicles would use suborbital trajectories. During descent, jet 
engines would be restarted at a specified altitude and the vehicle 
would fly to a powered, horizontal landing at the CSIA.
    Launch vehicles included in Concept Y would use rocket powered take 
off and flight, but non-powered horizontal landing. The rocket motors 
would be ignited while the launch vehicle is on the runway at the CSIA. 
These vehicles would use suborbital trajectories. The vehicle would not 
use powered descent but would glide to a horizontal landing at the CSIA.
    Concept Z launch vehicles would be carried aloft via assist 
aircraft with subsequent rocket ignition, and use non-powered 
horizontal landing. After taking off from a horizontal runway, the 
launch vehicle would be released from the assist aircraft and rocket 
engines on the launch vehicle would be fired. The assist aircraft would 
make a powered horizontal landing after releasing the launch vehicle. 
The launch vehicle would follow a suborbital trajectory. The launch 
vehicle would not use powered descent but would glide to a horizontal 
landing at the CSIA.
    The FAA considered two alternatives to the proposed action in the 
Draft EA. The first alternative would involve the issuance of a launch 
site operator license to OSIDA for the CSIA that would allow only 
Concept X and Y vehicles to be launched from the CSIA. The second 
alternative would involve the issuance of a launch site operator 
license to OSIDA for the CSIA that would allow only Concept X and Z 
vehicles to be launched from the CSIA. Finally, under the no action 
alternative, the FAA would not issue a launch site operator license to 
OSIDA and there would be no commercial launches from the CSIA. In 
addition, the FAA would not issue launch licenses or permits to any 
operators for launches from the CSIA. The CSIA would continue to be 
available for existing aviation and training related activities.
    Potential impacts of the proposed action and alternatives were 
analyzed in the Draft EA. Potential environmental impacts of successful 
launches include impacts to the atmosphere, airspace, biological 
resources, cultural resources, hazardous materials and hazardous waste, 
health and safety, geology and soils, land use and Section 4(f) 
resources, noise, socioeconomics and environmental justice, 
transportation, visual resources, and water resources.
    Potential impacts of the no action alternative would be the same as 
those described in the affected environment in the Draft EA. Potential 
cumulative impacts of the proposed action also are addressed in the 
Draft EA.

    Date Issued: January 25, 2006.
    Place Issued: Washington, DC.
Patricia Grace Smith,
Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. E6-1501 Filed 2-2-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.