Finding of No Significant Impact, 5715-5718 [E9-1974]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 19 / Friday, January 30, 2009 / Notices
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Numbers 59002 and 59008)
Frequency: On Occasion.
Description of Respondents: 8(a)
Program Participants.
Responses: 18,084.
Annual Burden: 18,084.
Title: 8(a) Annual Update.
SBA Form Number: 1450.
Frequency: On Occasion.
Description of Respondents: 8(a)
Program Participants.
Responses: 7,528.
Annual Burden: 14,516.
Herbert L. Mitchell,
Associate Administrator for Disaster
Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9–1963 Filed 1–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025–01–P
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Comment Request
Curtis B. Rich,
Acting Chief, Administrative Information
Branch.
[FR Doc. E9–2003 Filed 1–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025–01–P
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
[Disaster Declaration # 11607 and # 11608]
Massachusetts Disaster Number MA–
00020
AGENCY: U.S. Small Business
Administration.
ACTION: Amendment 1.
This is an amendment of the
Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for Public Assistance Only for
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
(FEMA–1813–DR), dated 01/05/2009.
Incident: Severe Winter Storm and
Flooding.
Incident Period: 12/11/2008 and
continuing.
SUMMARY:
Effective Date: 01/16/2009.
Physical Loan Application Deadline
Date: 03/06/2009.
Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan
Application Deadline Date: 10/05/2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan
applications to: U.S. Small Business
Administration, Processing And
Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A.
Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance,
U.S. Small Business Administration,
409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050,
Washington, DC 20416.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice
of the President’s major disaster
declaration for Private Non-Profit
organizations in the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, dated 01/05/2009, is
hereby amended to include the
following areas as adversely affected by
the disaster.
Primary Counties: Essex, Middlesex.
All other information in the original
declaration remains unchanged.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
DATES:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:54 Jan 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
The Social Security Administration
(SSA) publishes a list of information
collection packages requiring clearance
by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in compliance with
Public Law (Pub. L.) 104–13, the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
effective October 1, 1995. This notice
includes revisions to existing OMBapproved information collections.
SSA is soliciting comments on the
accuracy of the agency’s burden
estimate; the need for the information;
its practical utility; ways to enhance its
quality, utility, and clarity; and ways to
minimize the burden on respondents,
including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. Mail, email, or
fax your comments and
recommendations on the information
collection(s) to the OMB Desk Officer
and the SSA Reports Clearance Officer
to the addresses or fax numbers listed
below.
(OMB),
Office of Management and Budget,
Attn: Desk Officer for SSA,
Fax: 202–395–6974,
e-mail address: OIRA
Submission@omb.eop.gov.
(SSA),
Social Security Administration,
DCBFM,
Attn: Reports Clearance Officer,
1332 Annex Building,
6401 Security Blvd.,
Baltimore, MD 21235,
Fax: 410–965–6400,
e-mail address: OPLM.RCO@ssa.gov.
SSA has submitted the information
collections listed below to OMB for
clearance. Your comments on the
information collections would be most
useful if received by OMB and SSA
within 30 days from the date of this
publication. You can obtain a copy of
the OMB clearance packages by calling
the SSA Reports Clearance Officer at
410–965–3758, or by writing to the
above listed address.
Credit Card Payment Form—0960–
0648. SSA uses the information
collected on Form SSA–1414 to process
credit card payments for debts owed by
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5715
former employees and vendors. SSA
also uses the information collected on
Form SSA–1414 to process advance
payments for reimbursable agreements
and to process credit card payments for
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
requests that require payment. The
respondents are former employees and
vendors who have outstanding debts to
the agency, entities who have
reimbursable agreements with SSA, and
individuals who request information
through FOIA.
Type of Request: Extension of an
OMB-approved information collection.
Number of Respondents: 100.
Frequency of Response: 1.
Average Burden per Response: 5
minutes.
Estimated Annual Burden: 8 hours.
Dated: January 22, 2009.
John Biles,
Reports Clearance Officer, Social Security
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–1897 Filed 1–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4191–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Finding of No Significant Impact
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of environmental finding
document: finding of no significant
impact.
SUMMARY: The FAA participated as a
cooperating agency with the U.S. Air
Force (USAF) in preparation of the
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the
Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 Launch Vehicle
Program (Falcon Launch Vehicle
Program) at Cape Canaveral Air Force
Station (CCAFS), Florida, November
2007. The Falcon Launch Vehicle
Program is a commercial venture by
Space Exploration Technologies, Inc.
(SpaceX) to put spacecraft into orbit and
supply the International Space Station
(ISS) once the Space Shuttle is retired.
The Proposed Action analyzed in the
EA includes launching two space
launch vehicles, the Falcon 1 and the
Falcon 9 from Space Launch Complex
(SLC) 40, while utilizing the Solid
Motor Assembly and Readiness Facility
(SMARF) building as a vehicle support
facility, and the reentry and recovery of
the Dragon reentry capsule in the ocean.
The EA analyzed the environmental
consequences of conducting up to
twelve Falcon 1 launches per year and
up to twelve Falcon 9 launches per year
starting in 2008 for the next five years
E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM
30JAN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
5716
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 19 / Friday, January 30, 2009 / Notices
from SLC 40 at CCAFS. Two alternative
locations, SLC 37 and 47, were
considered for the launch of the Falcon
vehicles. The EA also analyzed the
environmental consequences of reentry/
recovery of the Dragon reentry capsule.
Additionally, the EA analyzed
infrastructure improvements proposed
at CCAFS to support the proposed
launch activities. The USAF signed a
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) on December 21, 2007, which
stated that the Proposed Action should
not have a significant environmental
impact on the human environment.
SpaceX is required to obtain a launch
license from the FAA to conduct
launches of the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9
launch vehicles with commercial
payloads. SpaceX also is required to
obtain a reentry license from the FAA
for the reentry of the Dragon capsule.
The FAA is using the EA to support its
environmental determination for a
launch license for SpaceX to launch
Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 vehicles at
CCAFS and a reentry license for the
Dragon capsule.
From its independent review and
consideration, the FAA has determined
that the Proposed Action addressed in
this FONSI, to issue a launch or reentry
license for Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 launch
vehicle activities, is substantially the
same as the actions analyzed in the
Falcon Launch Vehicle Program EA and
that FAA’s comments and suggestions
have been satisfied (see 1506.3(c) and
FAA Order 1050.1E, 518h). The FAA
formally adopts the EA and hereby
incorporates the analysis to support
future decisions on license applications.
After reviewing and analyzing
currently available data and information
on existing conditions, project impacts,
and measures to mitigate those impacts,
the FAA has determined that its action
is not a Federal action that would
significantly affect the quality of the
human environment within the meaning
of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). Therefore, the preparation
of an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) is not required and the FAA is
issuing this FONSI. The FAA made this
determination in accordance with all
applicable environmental laws.
For a Copy of the EA or FONSI
Contact: Questions or comments should
be directed to Mr. Daniel Czelusniak;
FAA Environmental Specialist; Federal
Aviation Administration; 800
Independence Ave., SW.; AST–I00,
Suite 331; Washington, DC 20591; (202)
267–5924.
Background
Launches of launch vehicles and
reentries of reentry vehicles must be
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:54 Jan 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
licensed by the FAA pursuant to 49
U.S.C. Sections 70101–70121, the
Commercial Space Launch Act. Issuing
a launch or reentry license is a Federal
action requiring environmental analysis
by the FAA in accordance with NEPA,
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. Upon receipt of
a complete license application, the FAA
must evaluate the information and
determine whether to issue a launch or
reentry license to SpaceX, as
appropriate. The FAA would use the
analyses in the Falcon Launch Vehicle
Program EA as the basis for the
environmental determination of the
impacts to support licensing launches of
the Falcon 1 launch vehicle or the
Falcon 9 launch vehicle from CCAFS
and/or the reentry of the Dragon reentry
vehicle. The issuance of a FONSI does
not guarantee that a license will be
issued by the FAA for the launch of the
Falcon launch vehicles or the reentry of
the Dragon capsule. Each license
application also must meet all safety,
risk, and indemnification requirements.
Proposed Action
SpaceX is proposing to launch the
Falcon 1 and the Falcon 9 launch
vehicles and the Dragon reentry capsule
from CCAF8. The Falcon 1 is a twostage, light-lift launch vehicle designed
to put small spacecraft into orbit. The
vehicle uses liquid oxygen (LOX) and
kerosene as propellants. Some payloads
are expected to be loaded with small
amounts of liquid or solid propellants
for use in orbit after the launch flight.
The first stage is recoverable and could
be reused. The second stage is not
reusable and is not intended to be
recovered.
The Falcon 9 is a two-stage, medium
class, liquid launch vehicle designed to
put space systems and satellites into
orbit. Falcon 9 uses LOX and kerosene
as propellants. The second stage and
payloads on the Falcon 9 could use
small quantities of LOX or kerosene or
other propellants including nitrogen
tetroxide (NTO), monomethylhydrazine
(MMH), or other hydrazine propellants,
and solid propellants. Both the first and
second stages of the Falcon 9 are
recoverable and could be reused.
The Dragon capsule could be carried
as a payload on the Falcon 9 vehicle.
The Dragon capsule is being developed
to deliver cargo to the ISS. Following its
mission to deliver cargo to the ISS, the
Dragon would reenter the atmosphere
on a pre-planned trajectory, would be
tracked to a soft landing in the ocean,
and would be recovered by a salvage
vehicle. The capsule could be
refurbished and reused. Locations in the
Atlantic Ocean (off the east coast of
Florida), the Pacific Ocean (off the coast
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
of California), and the equatorial Pacific
(near the Marshall Islands) are being
considered as recovery zones.
SpaceX has proposed several
infrastructure improvements to CCAFS
to support the proposed launch
activities, including modifications to
SLC 40 and construction of a vehicle
and payload processing facility. The
potential environmental consequences
of these connective actions are
considered in this FONSI.
Under the No Action Alternative, SLC
40 would not be modified and proceed
towards planned demolition. SLC 40
would not be used by the Falcon
Launch Vehicle Program to meet the
National Space Transportation Policy’s
goal of providing low-cost and reliable
access to space.
Environmental Impacts
The following presents a brief
summary of the environmental impacts
described in the Falcon Launch Vehicle
Program EA, which are incorporated by
reference in this FONSI. This FONSI is
based upon the impacts discussed in
that EA. The potential impacts
addressed in the EA have been analyzed
in previous NEPA documents such as
the 1998 Evolved Expendable Launch
Vehicle (EELV) Final EIS and 2002
NASA Routine Payload Final EA and
were used as the ‘‘generic standard’’ for
launch vehicles and spacecrafts.
Specifically, the Dragon capsule design
parameters fit within the ‘‘generic’’
spacecraft analyzed in the Routine
Payload Final EA. Also, the 2005
Programmatic Assessment for
Reactivation/Reuse of Launch
Complexes on CCAFS document
provided background information for
environmental impacts associated with
the reuse/reactivation of one or more
SLCs and the construction of a possible
new SLC based on currently known
conditions. These documents were used
to compare possible impacts of the
Falcon Launch Vehicle Program.
Air Quality: Any use of ozonedepleting substances would be in
accordance with federal, state, and local
laws regulating ozone-depleting
substance use, reuse, storage, and
disposal. There would be no impact on
stratospheric ozone. Generator
emissions associated with payload
processing would be regulated as
stationary sources by the Florida
Department of Environmental
Protection.
Emissions from launch vehicles
would not substantially impact ambient
air quality or endanger public health.
Each launch would be considered a
discrete event that would generate
short-term impacts on the local air
E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM
30JAN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 19 / Friday, January 30, 2009 / Notices
quality. Long-term effects resulting from
the launches would not be expected
because the launches would be
infrequent and the resulting emissions
would be rapidly dispersed and diluted
by winds in the troposphere. The Falcon
Launch Vehicle Program would not
have an appreciable affect on PM2.5
standards under the current attainment
status of CCAFS.
Biological Resources: Site
modifications would take place in a
developed area and would not entail
new ground disturbance. In addition,
there would be no disturbance of
wetlands because there are no wetlands
within the boundary of SLC 40.
Biological resource impacts would not
be expected from the modification,
construction, or use of proposed launch
and support facilities. A United States
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
approved light management plan would
be implemented prior to construction
activities and activation of the launch
facility to ensure sea turtles are not
impacted.
Launch activities could cause some
small impacts near the launch pad
associated with fire and acidic
deposition, but impacts from the Falcon
vehicles would be less than those from
previous launch vehicles. Although
Florida scrub jays, gopher tortoise,
southeastern beach mice, indigo snakes
and sea turtle nesting occur in the
vicinity of SLC 40, post-launch
monitoring conducted on previous
launches concluded that launch impacts
to these species are minimal.
Additionally, sonic booms from
launches are not expected to negatively
affect the survival of any marine
species. Exterior lighting at all facilities
used for spacecraft processing at CCAFS
would comply with established lighting
policy to minimize disorienting effects
on sea turtle hatchlings.
Cultural Resources: SLC 40 is not
eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historical Places. It is not
considered a historic complex, and
there are no historic properties or
known archeological sites located in the
immediate vicinity. No significant
impacts to known historic or
archeological resources would be
expected as a result of the Proposed
Action.
Geology and Soils: No unique geologic
features of exceptional interest or
mineral resources occur in the project
area. Construction related to the
Proposed Action would not affect
geology and soils; nor would operation
of the Falcon Launch Vehicle Program
affect geology or soils in the vicinity of
SLC 40. Potential wind and water
erosion would be controlled by the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:54 Jan 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
development and implementation of a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.
Hazardous Materials and Waste: All
hazardous materials associated with the
Proposed Action would be handled and
disposed of per the requirements
established by the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA) and
the Hazardous Materials Contingency
Plan developed for the Falcon Launch
Vehicle Program. Any materials
remaining after completion of payload
processing would be properly stored for
future use or disposed of in accordance
with all applicable regulations. All
applicable federal, state, county, and
USAF rules and regulations would be
followed for the proper storage,
handling, and usage of hazardous
materials under the Falcon Launch
Vehicle Program. Furthermore, the
Proposed Action would not be expected
to result in significant impacts on
hazardous materials management or
hazardous materials emergency
response.
Hazardous waste streams generated by
the Falcon Launch Vehicle Program
would be typical of other hazardous
waste streams in Florida. The existing
hazardous waste landfills would have
sufficient capacity to handle the small
amounts of hazardous waste expected to
be generated under the Proposed
Action. Furthermore, no significant
impacts on hazardous waste
management would be expected.
Health and Safety: Proposed
refurbishment activities would comply
with all federal OSHA regulations and
all applicable Air Force Instructions and
regulations on refurbishment safety,
including AFI 32–1023, Design and
Refurbishment Standards and Execution
of Facility Refurbishment Projects, and
Air Force Occupational Safety and
Health Standards (AFOSH). Therefore,
health and safety impacts during
refurbishment would not be significant.
CCAFS range safety regulations
ensure that the general public, launch
area personnel, and foreign landmasses
are provided an acceptable level of
safety, and that all aspects of pre-launch
and launch operations adhere to public
laws. Range safety organizations review,
approve, monitor, and impose safety
holds, when necessary, on all prelaunch and launch operations. Health
and safety impacts to personnel
involved in propellant loading
operations in the payload processing
facilities would be minimized by
adherence to OSHA and AFOSH
regulations. The Proposed Action would
not be expected to result in significant
impacts on health and safety.
Orbital Debris: Lower stages of the
Falcon would burn out and splash down
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5717
in the open ocean. Upper stages that
achieve Low Earth Orbit would be
programmed after spacecraft separation
to burn residual propellants to depletion
in a vector that would result in reentry
in two to three months for a soft-water
landing. Upper stages going to higher
orbits are not subject to controlled
reentry and would contribute to orbital
debris. The contribution to orbital
debris from the launch of Falcon 1 and
Falcon 9 vehicles and spacecraft would
not be expected to have a significant
impact on the environment.
Utilities: The existing water supply
system at SLC 40 can support Falcon 1
and Falcon 9 launch requirements. The
amount of solid waste generated under
the Proposed Action would be minimal
compared to the capacity of the on-base
or approved off-base landfills. The
electrical power needs of the Falcon
Launch Vehicle Program are within the
capacity of existing systems. Therefore,
no significant impacts on water supply,
solid waste management, or electrical
power would be expected.
Transportation: A maximum of 15
personnel and 15 daily vehicle round
trips would support construction and
refurbishment activities, which would
not constitute a significant increase in
traffic volumes on roadways in the
vicinity of CCAFS. A maximum of 25
personnel and 25 daily vehicle round
trips would support launch operation
activities, which would not constitute a
significant increase in traffic volumes
on key roadways within CCAFS areas.
Land Use and Visual Resources: The
Proposed Action would occur primarily
in areas designated for space launch
activities. Operations would be
consistent with both the Base General
Plan and the USAF mission at CCAFS.
Activities at SLC 40 and surrounding
areas would be in conformance with its
designated use. Therefore, no significant
land use impacts would be expected.
SpaceX operational activities would
have less visual impact than that of
prior SLC 40 activities; therefore, no
significant impacts within the flight
range of the Falcon launch vehicles
would be expected.
Noise: There would be a temporary
increase in ambient noise levels during
construction and refurbishment
activities. However, there are no
residential areas or sensitive receptors
in the vicinity of SLC 40. Refurbishment
activities would not be expected to
significantly impact endangered species
potentially located at SLC 40. Hearing
protection would be provided if sound
levels exceed OSHA limits.
Based on modeled engine noise levels
for the Falcon 1, noise levels associated
with the Proposed Action would not be
E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM
30JAN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
5718
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 19 / Friday, January 30, 2009 / Notices
expected to exceed the DNL threshold of
65 dBA in nearby residential areas or
exceed the 85 dBA noise threshold limit
value recommended for workers in an 8hour day. Noise produced from Falcon
1 and Falcon 9 launch vehicles would
be sufficiently reduced by the deluge
system and would not be expected
produce negative affects beyond those
that have already been analyzed and
experienced under ongoing launch
activities. Impacts on humans from
sonic booms would not be significant
under the Proposed Action.
Socioeconomics: Construction and
refurbishment activities would result in
a temporary and minor increase in the
number of on-base personnel. This
increase would not represent a
significant increase in the population or
growth rate of the region, since most of
the construction crew already live and
work in the area.
The addition of up to 25 workers at
CCAFS to support the Proposed Action
does not represent a significant increase
in the population or growth rate of the
region. The Proposed Action would not
significantly affect the local housing
market or result in the need for new
social services or support facilities. The
Proposed Action would not generate
negative socioeconomic impacts in the
region.
Environmental Justice: Environmental
impacts generated by operation,
construction, and refurbishment
activities for the Proposed Action would
not be significant and would not
adversely affect minority or low-income
populations or children. The operation
and refurbishment of the Proposed
Action would not cause any
environmental justice impacts.
Water Resources: Construction in the
northeast quadrant of SLC 40 would not
substantially alter the existing drainage
course and adverse impacts to natural
drainage would not be expected. A
Storm Water Erosion and Pollution
Prevention Plan would be developed
and implemented to minimize impacts
from erosion. SpaceX would obtain all
necessary permits. Proposed
construction and refurbishment
activities would not be expected to
disturb wetlands or affect any
floodplains.
No impacts on surface water quality
would occur from industrial wastewater
from the deluge water system.
Significant impacts would not be
expected on jurisdictional waters of the
United States from inadvertent
discharge of deluge wastewater. When
the first stage splashes down in the
ocean, approximately 5 gallons of RP–l
would be expelled and would dissipate
within hours and would not
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:54 Jan 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
significantly impact water quality.
Water demands for the Proposed Action
would be supplied by existing water
distribution systems at CCAFS, and
wastewater would be processed through
existing wastewater handling and
treatment systems at CCAFS. Water
demands would have a negligible
impact on these existing systems, and
local and regional water resources
would not be affected.
Cumulative Impacts: Cumulative
impacts to biological resources, air
quality, and water resources were
considered in the Falcon Launch
Vehicle Program EA. Some vegetative
damage could occur from occasional
brush fires and/or heat from the launch
and acid deposition in the near-field
areas. The loss of tree and shrub species
and an increase of grass and sedge
species could occur. Far-field vegetation
should recover between launches since
far-field deposition would not occur in
the same area after each launch. There
should be no significant impacts on
terrestrial wildlife from the exhaust
cloud because the cloud would remain
in anyone area for only a short period
of time. The implementation of a light
management plan to reduce beach
lighting during the nesting season
should reduce adverse impacts to sea
turtles.
Because the atmospheric emissions
associated with launch programs are
brief and sporadic, the long-term
cumulative air quality impacts in the
lower atmosphere would not be
expected to be significant. Short-term
cumulative air quality impacts would
not occur because launches for the
various programs would not be
conducted at the same time. The
relatively small emissions associated
with ground support operations would
have little incremental and cumulative
impact in an area that presently meets
air quality standards. No long-term
adverse air impacts would be expected
from refurbishment activities. No
cumulative impacts to water resources
would be expected.
Determination: An analysis of the
Proposed Action has concluded that
there would be no significant short-term
or long-term effects to the environment
or surrounding populations. After
careful and thorough consideration of
the facts herein, the undersigned finds
that the proposed Federal action is
consistent with existing national
environmental policies and objectives
set forth in Section 101(a) of the NEPA
and other applicable environmental
requirements and will not significantly
affect the quality of the human
environment or otherwise include any
condition requiring consultation
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
pursuant to Section I 02(2)( c) of NEPA.
Therefore, an Environmental Impact
Statement for the Proposed Action is not
required.
Issued in Washington, DC on: January 15,
2009.
George Nield,
Associate Administrator for Commercial
Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. E9–1974 Filed 1–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
NextGen Mid-Term Implementation
Task Force
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of NextGen Mid-Term
Implementation Task Force meeting.
SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice
to advise the public of a meeting of the
NextGen Mid-Term Implementation
Task Force.
DATES: The meeting will be held
February 10, 2009 starting at 1 p.m. to
4 p.m.
ADDRESS: Discovery Ballroom, Holiday
Inn Capitol, 550 C Street, SW., Corner
of 6th & C Streets, SW., Washington, DC
20024 (METRO: L’Enfant Plaza Station,
Use 7th & Maryland Exit).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW.,
Suite 850, Washington, DC, 20036;
telephone (202) 833–9339; fax (202)
833–9434; Web site https://www.rtca.org.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–
463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is
hereby given for a NextGen Mid-Term
Implementation Task Force meeting.
The agenda will include:
• Opening Plenary (Welcome and
Introductions).
• NextGen Implementation Overview
and Establishment of
• NextGen Mid-Term Implementation
Task Force.
• NextGen Task Force Terms of
Reference, Organization, and
Leadership.
• Closing Plenary (Other Business,
Document Production, Date and Place of
Next Meeting, Adjourn).
Attendance is open to the interested
public but limited to space availability.
With the approval of the chairman,
members of the public may present oral
statements at the meeting. Persons
wishing to present statements or obtain
information should contact the person
E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM
30JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 19 (Friday, January 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5715-5718]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1974]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Finding of No Significant Impact
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of environmental finding document: finding of no
significant impact.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA participated as a cooperating agency with the U.S. Air
Force (USAF) in preparation of the Environmental Assessment (EA) for
the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 Launch Vehicle Program (Falcon Launch Vehicle
Program) at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), Florida, November
2007. The Falcon Launch Vehicle Program is a commercial venture by
Space Exploration Technologies, Inc. (SpaceX) to put spacecraft into
orbit and supply the International Space Station (ISS) once the Space
Shuttle is retired. The Proposed Action analyzed in the EA includes
launching two space launch vehicles, the Falcon 1 and the Falcon 9 from
Space Launch Complex (SLC) 40, while utilizing the Solid Motor Assembly
and Readiness Facility (SMARF) building as a vehicle support facility,
and the reentry and recovery of the Dragon reentry capsule in the
ocean.
The EA analyzed the environmental consequences of conducting up to
twelve Falcon 1 launches per year and up to twelve Falcon 9 launches
per year starting in 2008 for the next five years
[[Page 5716]]
from SLC 40 at CCAFS. Two alternative locations, SLC 37 and 47, were
considered for the launch of the Falcon vehicles. The EA also analyzed
the environmental consequences of reentry/recovery of the Dragon
reentry capsule. Additionally, the EA analyzed infrastructure
improvements proposed at CCAFS to support the proposed launch
activities. The USAF signed a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
on December 21, 2007, which stated that the Proposed Action should not
have a significant environmental impact on the human environment.
SpaceX is required to obtain a launch license from the FAA to
conduct launches of the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 launch vehicles with
commercial payloads. SpaceX also is required to obtain a reentry
license from the FAA for the reentry of the Dragon capsule. The FAA is
using the EA to support its environmental determination for a launch
license for SpaceX to launch Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 vehicles at CCAFS
and a reentry license for the Dragon capsule.
From its independent review and consideration, the FAA has
determined that the Proposed Action addressed in this FONSI, to issue a
launch or reentry license for Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 launch vehicle
activities, is substantially the same as the actions analyzed in the
Falcon Launch Vehicle Program EA and that FAA's comments and
suggestions have been satisfied (see 1506.3(c) and FAA Order 1050.1E,
518h). The FAA formally adopts the EA and hereby incorporates the
analysis to support future decisions on license applications.
After reviewing and analyzing currently available data and
information on existing conditions, project impacts, and measures to
mitigate those impacts, the FAA has determined that its action is not a
Federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human
environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) is not required and the FAA is issuing this FONSI. The FAA made
this determination in accordance with all applicable environmental
laws.
For a Copy of the EA or FONSI Contact: Questions or comments should
be directed to Mr. Daniel Czelusniak; FAA Environmental Specialist;
Federal Aviation Administration; 800 Independence Ave., SW.; AST-I00,
Suite 331; Washington, DC 20591; (202) 267-5924.
Background
Launches of launch vehicles and reentries of reentry vehicles must
be licensed by the FAA pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Sections 70101-70121, the
Commercial Space Launch Act. Issuing a launch or reentry license is a
Federal action requiring environmental analysis by the FAA in
accordance with NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. Upon receipt of a complete
license application, the FAA must evaluate the information and
determine whether to issue a launch or reentry license to SpaceX, as
appropriate. The FAA would use the analyses in the Falcon Launch
Vehicle Program EA as the basis for the environmental determination of
the impacts to support licensing launches of the Falcon 1 launch
vehicle or the Falcon 9 launch vehicle from CCAFS and/or the reentry of
the Dragon reentry vehicle. The issuance of a FONSI does not guarantee
that a license will be issued by the FAA for the launch of the Falcon
launch vehicles or the reentry of the Dragon capsule. Each license
application also must meet all safety, risk, and indemnification
requirements.
Proposed Action
SpaceX is proposing to launch the Falcon 1 and the Falcon 9 launch
vehicles and the Dragon reentry capsule from CCAF8. The Falcon 1 is a
two-stage, light-lift launch vehicle designed to put small spacecraft
into orbit. The vehicle uses liquid oxygen (LOX) and kerosene as
propellants. Some payloads are expected to be loaded with small amounts
of liquid or solid propellants for use in orbit after the launch
flight. The first stage is recoverable and could be reused. The second
stage is not reusable and is not intended to be recovered.
The Falcon 9 is a two-stage, medium class, liquid launch vehicle
designed to put space systems and satellites into orbit. Falcon 9 uses
LOX and kerosene as propellants. The second stage and payloads on the
Falcon 9 could use small quantities of LOX or kerosene or other
propellants including nitrogen tetroxide (NTO), monomethylhydrazine
(MMH), or other hydrazine propellants, and solid propellants. Both the
first and second stages of the Falcon 9 are recoverable and could be
reused.
The Dragon capsule could be carried as a payload on the Falcon 9
vehicle. The Dragon capsule is being developed to deliver cargo to the
ISS. Following its mission to deliver cargo to the ISS, the Dragon
would reenter the atmosphere on a pre-planned trajectory, would be
tracked to a soft landing in the ocean, and would be recovered by a
salvage vehicle. The capsule could be refurbished and reused. Locations
in the Atlantic Ocean (off the east coast of Florida), the Pacific
Ocean (off the coast of California), and the equatorial Pacific (near
the Marshall Islands) are being considered as recovery zones.
SpaceX has proposed several infrastructure improvements to CCAFS to
support the proposed launch activities, including modifications to SLC
40 and construction of a vehicle and payload processing facility. The
potential environmental consequences of these connective actions are
considered in this FONSI.
Under the No Action Alternative, SLC 40 would not be modified and
proceed towards planned demolition. SLC 40 would not be used by the
Falcon Launch Vehicle Program to meet the National Space Transportation
Policy's goal of providing low-cost and reliable access to space.
Environmental Impacts
The following presents a brief summary of the environmental impacts
described in the Falcon Launch Vehicle Program EA, which are
incorporated by reference in this FONSI. This FONSI is based upon the
impacts discussed in that EA. The potential impacts addressed in the EA
have been analyzed in previous NEPA documents such as the 1998 Evolved
Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) Final EIS and 2002 NASA Routine
Payload Final EA and were used as the ``generic standard'' for launch
vehicles and spacecrafts. Specifically, the Dragon capsule design
parameters fit within the ``generic'' spacecraft analyzed in the
Routine Payload Final EA. Also, the 2005 Programmatic Assessment for
Reactivation/Reuse of Launch Complexes on CCAFS document provided
background information for environmental impacts associated with the
reuse/reactivation of one or more SLCs and the construction of a
possible new SLC based on currently known conditions. These documents
were used to compare possible impacts of the Falcon Launch Vehicle
Program.
Air Quality: Any use of ozone-depleting substances would be in
accordance with federal, state, and local laws regulating ozone-
depleting substance use, reuse, storage, and disposal. There would be
no impact on stratospheric ozone. Generator emissions associated with
payload processing would be regulated as stationary sources by the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
Emissions from launch vehicles would not substantially impact
ambient air quality or endanger public health. Each launch would be
considered a discrete event that would generate short-term impacts on
the local air
[[Page 5717]]
quality. Long-term effects resulting from the launches would not be
expected because the launches would be infrequent and the resulting
emissions would be rapidly dispersed and diluted by winds in the
troposphere. The Falcon Launch Vehicle Program would not have an
appreciable affect on PM2.5 standards under the current attainment
status of CCAFS.
Biological Resources: Site modifications would take place in a
developed area and would not entail new ground disturbance. In
addition, there would be no disturbance of wetlands because there are
no wetlands within the boundary of SLC 40. Biological resource impacts
would not be expected from the modification, construction, or use of
proposed launch and support facilities. A United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) approved light management plan would be
implemented prior to construction activities and activation of the
launch facility to ensure sea turtles are not impacted.
Launch activities could cause some small impacts near the launch
pad associated with fire and acidic deposition, but impacts from the
Falcon vehicles would be less than those from previous launch vehicles.
Although Florida scrub jays, gopher tortoise, southeastern beach mice,
indigo snakes and sea turtle nesting occur in the vicinity of SLC 40,
post-launch monitoring conducted on previous launches concluded that
launch impacts to these species are minimal. Additionally, sonic booms
from launches are not expected to negatively affect the survival of any
marine species. Exterior lighting at all facilities used for spacecraft
processing at CCAFS would comply with established lighting policy to
minimize disorienting effects on sea turtle hatchlings.
Cultural Resources: SLC 40 is not eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historical Places. It is not considered a historic
complex, and there are no historic properties or known archeological
sites located in the immediate vicinity. No significant impacts to
known historic or archeological resources would be expected as a result
of the Proposed Action.
Geology and Soils: No unique geologic features of exceptional
interest or mineral resources occur in the project area. Construction
related to the Proposed Action would not affect geology and soils; nor
would operation of the Falcon Launch Vehicle Program affect geology or
soils in the vicinity of SLC 40. Potential wind and water erosion would
be controlled by the development and implementation of a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan.
Hazardous Materials and Waste: All hazardous materials associated
with the Proposed Action would be handled and disposed of per the
requirements established by the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) and the Hazardous Materials Contingency Plan
developed for the Falcon Launch Vehicle Program. Any materials
remaining after completion of payload processing would be properly
stored for future use or disposed of in accordance with all applicable
regulations. All applicable federal, state, county, and USAF rules and
regulations would be followed for the proper storage, handling, and
usage of hazardous materials under the Falcon Launch Vehicle Program.
Furthermore, the Proposed Action would not be expected to result in
significant impacts on hazardous materials management or hazardous
materials emergency response.
Hazardous waste streams generated by the Falcon Launch Vehicle
Program would be typical of other hazardous waste streams in Florida.
The existing hazardous waste landfills would have sufficient capacity
to handle the small amounts of hazardous waste expected to be generated
under the Proposed Action. Furthermore, no significant impacts on
hazardous waste management would be expected.
Health and Safety: Proposed refurbishment activities would comply
with all federal OSHA regulations and all applicable Air Force
Instructions and regulations on refurbishment safety, including AFI 32-
1023, Design and Refurbishment Standards and Execution of Facility
Refurbishment Projects, and Air Force Occupational Safety and Health
Standards (AFOSH). Therefore, health and safety impacts during
refurbishment would not be significant.
CCAFS range safety regulations ensure that the general public,
launch area personnel, and foreign landmasses are provided an
acceptable level of safety, and that all aspects of pre-launch and
launch operations adhere to public laws. Range safety organizations
review, approve, monitor, and impose safety holds, when necessary, on
all pre-launch and launch operations. Health and safety impacts to
personnel involved in propellant loading operations in the payload
processing facilities would be minimized by adherence to OSHA and AFOSH
regulations. The Proposed Action would not be expected to result in
significant impacts on health and safety.
Orbital Debris: Lower stages of the Falcon would burn out and
splash down in the open ocean. Upper stages that achieve Low Earth
Orbit would be programmed after spacecraft separation to burn residual
propellants to depletion in a vector that would result in reentry in
two to three months for a soft-water landing. Upper stages going to
higher orbits are not subject to controlled reentry and would
contribute to orbital debris. The contribution to orbital debris from
the launch of Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 vehicles and spacecraft would not
be expected to have a significant impact on the environment.
Utilities: The existing water supply system at SLC 40 can support
Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 launch requirements. The amount of solid waste
generated under the Proposed Action would be minimal compared to the
capacity of the on-base or approved off-base landfills. The electrical
power needs of the Falcon Launch Vehicle Program are within the
capacity of existing systems. Therefore, no significant impacts on
water supply, solid waste management, or electrical power would be
expected.
Transportation: A maximum of 15 personnel and 15 daily vehicle
round trips would support construction and refurbishment activities,
which would not constitute a significant increase in traffic volumes on
roadways in the vicinity of CCAFS. A maximum of 25 personnel and 25
daily vehicle round trips would support launch operation activities,
which would not constitute a significant increase in traffic volumes on
key roadways within CCAFS areas.
Land Use and Visual Resources: The Proposed Action would occur
primarily in areas designated for space launch activities. Operations
would be consistent with both the Base General Plan and the USAF
mission at CCAFS. Activities at SLC 40 and surrounding areas would be
in conformance with its designated use. Therefore, no significant land
use impacts would be expected.
SpaceX operational activities would have less visual impact than
that of prior SLC 40 activities; therefore, no significant impacts
within the flight range of the Falcon launch vehicles would be
expected.
Noise: There would be a temporary increase in ambient noise levels
during construction and refurbishment activities. However, there are no
residential areas or sensitive receptors in the vicinity of SLC 40.
Refurbishment activities would not be expected to significantly impact
endangered species potentially located at SLC 40. Hearing protection
would be provided if sound levels exceed OSHA limits.
Based on modeled engine noise levels for the Falcon 1, noise levels
associated with the Proposed Action would not be
[[Page 5718]]
expected to exceed the DNL threshold of 65 dBA in nearby residential
areas or exceed the 85 dBA noise threshold limit value recommended for
workers in an 8-hour day. Noise produced from Falcon 1 and Falcon 9
launch vehicles would be sufficiently reduced by the deluge system and
would not be expected produce negative affects beyond those that have
already been analyzed and experienced under ongoing launch activities.
Impacts on humans from sonic booms would not be significant under the
Proposed Action.
Socioeconomics: Construction and refurbishment activities would
result in a temporary and minor increase in the number of on-base
personnel. This increase would not represent a significant increase in
the population or growth rate of the region, since most of the
construction crew already live and work in the area.
The addition of up to 25 workers at CCAFS to support the Proposed
Action does not represent a significant increase in the population or
growth rate of the region. The Proposed Action would not significantly
affect the local housing market or result in the need for new social
services or support facilities. The Proposed Action would not generate
negative socioeconomic impacts in the region.
Environmental Justice: Environmental impacts generated by
operation, construction, and refurbishment activities for the Proposed
Action would not be significant and would not adversely affect minority
or low-income populations or children. The operation and refurbishment
of the Proposed Action would not cause any environmental justice
impacts.
Water Resources: Construction in the northeast quadrant of SLC 40
would not substantially alter the existing drainage course and adverse
impacts to natural drainage would not be expected. A Storm Water
Erosion and Pollution Prevention Plan would be developed and
implemented to minimize impacts from erosion. SpaceX would obtain all
necessary permits. Proposed construction and refurbishment activities
would not be expected to disturb wetlands or affect any floodplains.
No impacts on surface water quality would occur from industrial
wastewater from the deluge water system. Significant impacts would not
be expected on jurisdictional waters of the United States from
inadvertent discharge of deluge wastewater. When the first stage
splashes down in the ocean, approximately 5 gallons of RP-l would be
expelled and would dissipate within hours and would not significantly
impact water quality. Water demands for the Proposed Action would be
supplied by existing water distribution systems at CCAFS, and
wastewater would be processed through existing wastewater handling and
treatment systems at CCAFS. Water demands would have a negligible
impact on these existing systems, and local and regional water
resources would not be affected.
Cumulative Impacts: Cumulative impacts to biological resources, air
quality, and water resources were considered in the Falcon Launch
Vehicle Program EA. Some vegetative damage could occur from occasional
brush fires and/or heat from the launch and acid deposition in the
near-field areas. The loss of tree and shrub species and an increase of
grass and sedge species could occur. Far-field vegetation should
recover between launches since far-field deposition would not occur in
the same area after each launch. There should be no significant impacts
on terrestrial wildlife from the exhaust cloud because the cloud would
remain in anyone area for only a short period of time. The
implementation of a light management plan to reduce beach lighting
during the nesting season should reduce adverse impacts to sea turtles.
Because the atmospheric emissions associated with launch programs
are brief and sporadic, the long-term cumulative air quality impacts in
the lower atmosphere would not be expected to be significant. Short-
term cumulative air quality impacts would not occur because launches
for the various programs would not be conducted at the same time. The
relatively small emissions associated with ground support operations
would have little incremental and cumulative impact in an area that
presently meets air quality standards. No long-term adverse air impacts
would be expected from refurbishment activities. No cumulative impacts
to water resources would be expected.
Determination: An analysis of the Proposed Action has concluded
that there would be no significant short-term or long-term effects to
the environment or surrounding populations. After careful and thorough
consideration of the facts herein, the undersigned finds that the
proposed Federal action is consistent with existing national
environmental policies and objectives set forth in Section 101(a) of
the NEPA and other applicable environmental requirements and will not
significantly affect the quality of the human environment or otherwise
include any condition requiring consultation pursuant to Section I
02(2)( c) of NEPA. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement for the
Proposed Action is not required.
Issued in Washington, DC on: January 15, 2009.
George Nield,
Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. E9-1974 Filed 1-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P