National Environmental Policy Act; Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) Mission, 4133-4137 [2011-1366]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2011 / Notices
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Agency: Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA).
Title of Collection: Slope and Shaft
Sinking Plans.
OMB Control Number: 1219–0019.
Affected Public: Private sector,
businesses or other for-profits.
Total Estimated Number of
Respondents: 73.
Total Estimated Number of
Responses: 73.
Total Estimated Annual Burden
Hours: 1,460.
Total Estimated Annual Costs Burden:
$1,272.
Dated: January 18, 2011.
Michel Smyth,
Departmental Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011–1306 Filed 1–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–43–P
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice: (11–007)]
NASA Advisory Council; Meeting
Dated: January 14, 2011.
P. Diane Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer,
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration.
National Aeronautics and
Space Administration.
ACTION: Notice of Meeting.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public
Law 92–463, as amended, the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration
announces a meeting of the NASA
Advisory Council.
DATES: Thursday, February 10, 2011,
8 a.m.–5 p.m., Local Time. Friday,
February 11, 2011, 8 a.m.–12 p.m., Local
Time.
ADDRESSES: NASA Headquarters, 300 E
Street, SW., Room 9H40, (PRC),
Washington, DC 20456.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Marla King, NAC Administrative
Officer, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration Headquarters,
Washington, DC 20546, (202) 358–1148.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
agenda for the meeting will include
reports from the NAC Committees:
—Aeronautics.
—Audit, Finance and Analysis.
—Commercial Space.
—Education and Public Outreach.
—Exploration.
—Science.
—Space Operations.
—Technology and Innovation.
The meeting will be open to the public
up to the seating capacity of the room.
It is imperative that the meeting be held
on this date to accommodate the
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Jan 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
scheduling priorities of the key
participants. Visitors will need to show
a valid picture identification such as a
driver’s license to enter the NASA
Headquarters building (West Lobby—
Visitor Control Center), and must state
that they are attending the NASA
Advisory Council meeting in room 9H40
before receiving an access badge. All
non-U.S citizens must fax a copy of
their passport, and print or type their
name, current address, citizenship,
company affiliation (if applicable) to
include address, telephone number, and
their title, place of birth, date of birth,
U.S. visa information to include type,
number, and expiration date, U.S. Social
Security Number (if applicable), and
place and date of entry into the U.S. Fax
to Marla King, NASA Advisory Council
Administrative Officer, FAX: (202) 358–
3030, by no later than February 1, 2011.
To expedite admittance, attendees with
U.S. citizenship can provide identifying
information 3 working days in advance
by contacting Marla King via e-mail at
marla.k.king@nasa.gov or by telephone
at (202) 358–1148 or fax: (202) 358–
3030.
[FR Doc. 2011–1367 Filed 1–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice (11–008)]
National Environmental Policy Act;
Mars Science Laboratory (MSL)
Mission
National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Notice of Modified Record of
Decision (ROD) for MSL Final
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
AGENCY:
Pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act, as amended,
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the
Council on Environmental Quality
Regulations for Implementing the
Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR
parts 1500–1508), and NASA’s NEPA
policy and procedures (14 CFR part
1216, subpart 1216.3), NASA prepared
and issued the Final EIS for the
proposed MSL Mission. A ROD was
issued on December 27, 2006 indicating
NASA’s decision to prepare and launch
the MSL Mission in 2009. A copy of the
Final EIS and ROD are available at the
following Web site: https://
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4133
science.nasa.gov/missions/msl/. NASA
was unable to finish preparation of the
MSL Mission in time for the 2009
launch opportunity, and NASA Science
Mission Directorate (SMD) Associate
Administrator issued a modified ROD
indicating NASA’s decision to complete
preparation and launch the MSL
mission in 2011. The full text of the
modified ROD is provided below.
DATES: Effective Date: January 24, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Additional information about NASA’s
MSL Mission is available on the MSL
Mission Web site at https://
science.nasa.gov/missions/msl/. Agency
Point of Contact: Mr. Dave Lavery,
Planetary Science Division, Science
Mission Directorate, NASA
Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546–
0001, telephone 202–358–4800, or
electronic mail dave.lavery@nasa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Modified Record of Decision: NASA
MSL Mission
This modified Record of Decision
(ROD) documents NASA’s consideration
of possible changes in the potential
environmental impacts of the Mars
Science Laboratory (MSL) mission with
the launch postponed from the original
2009 launch opportunity to the next
available launch opportunity in 2011.
This document modifies the ROD
issued for the MSL mission on
December 27, 2006. In 2006, NASA
decided to complete preparations for
launch of the MSL mission during a
September to November 2009 launch
period and to operate the mission using
a Multi-Mission Radioisotope
Thermoelectric Generator (MMRTG) as
the primary power source for the rover.
However, in December 2008, NASA
made a determination that the MSL
rover could not be ready in time for the
original 2009 launch window because of
unexpected spacecraft technical and
testing challenges. Launch opportunities
for Mars missions occur approximately
every 26 months; consequently, the next
launch opportunity is November to
December 2011. NASA is continuing
preparations for launch of the MSL
mission during this next launch
opportunity.
In considering the launch of the MSL
mission during late 2011, NASA
identified factors that might affect the
environmental impact analysis
presented in the existing Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
for the MSL mission. The Department of
Energy (DOE) helped NASA reassess
potential radiological impacts by
evaluating the nuclear risk described in
the 2006 FEIS against up to date
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
4134
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2011 / Notices
information regarding the MSL mission
and use of the 2011 launch opportunity.
Factors included in this evaluation
included the launch vehicle selection,
duration and time of the launch period,
meteorology for the launch period,
launch trajectories, and ground
processing of the launch vehicle. NASA
also reassessed the non-radiological
environmental impacts discussed in the
FEIS against up to date information
regarding the MSL mission. Factors
included in this evaluation included
updated information concerning
spacecraft trajectories and potential
reentry accidents and environments.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Background (Purpose and Need for the
Proposed Mission)
The purpose of the MSL mission is to
both conduct comprehensive science on
the surface of Mars and demonstrate
technological advancements in the
exploration of Mars. As described in the
2006 FEIS, the mission’s overall
scientific goals are: (1) Assess the
biological potential of at least one
selected site on Mars; (2) characterize
the geology and geochemistry of the
landing region at all appropriate spatial
scales; (3) investigate planetary
processes of relevance to past
habitability; and (4) characterize the
broad spectrum of the Martian surface
radiation environment. The objectives
planned for the mission are described in
the December 27, 2006, NASA Record of
Decision for the MSL mission.
History of MSL NEPA Compliance
Activities
NASA prepared an environmental
impact statement (EIS) to analyze the
potential environmental impacts of the
planned MSL mission. The DOE was a
cooperating agency in the EIS because
the Proposed Action would use a DOEdeveloped and owned radioisotope
power system (RPS), specifically the
MMRTG, to provide electrical power for
the MSL rover.
On March 10, 2006, NASA published
a Notice of Intent in the Federal
Register (71 FR 12402) to prepare an EIS
and conduct scoping for the MSL
mission. Public input and comments on
alternatives, potential environmental
impacts and concerns associated with
the proposed MSL mission were
requested. The scoping period ended on
April 24, 2006. One scoping comment
was received during this period from a
Federal agency expressing concerns
regarding habitat management of
threatened and endangered species near
the MSL launch site at Cape Canaveral
Air Force Station (CCAFS), Florida.
These concerns were addressed in the
Draft EIS (DEIS).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Jan 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
NASA published a Notice of
Availability (NOA) of the DEIS for the
MSL mission in the Federal Register on
September 5, 2006 (71 FR 52347). The
DEIS was mailed by NASA to 59
potentially interested Federal, State and
local agencies, organizations and
individuals. In addition, the DEIS was
publicly available in electronic format
on NASA’s Web site. The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
published its NOA for the DEIS in the
Federal Register on September 8, 2006
(71 FR 53093), initiating the 45-day
review and comment period.
The public review and comment
period closed on October 23, 2006.
NASA received ten comment
submissions (letters and other written
comments) from three Federal agencies,
one State agency, one private
organization, and five individuals. The
comments received included ‘‘no
comment’’, requests for clarification of
specific sections of text, and objections
to the use of nuclear material for space
missions. In addition, NASA received a
total of 34 comment submissions via
electronic mail (e-mail) from 32
individuals. These comment
submissions include objections to the
use of nuclear material for space
missions, and general support for the
proposed MSL mission. These
comments were considered in
developing the FEIS, and responses to
these comments were prepared and
included in the FEIS as Appendix D.
In addition to soliciting comments for
submittal by letter and e-mail, NASA
held three meetings during which the
public was invited to provide both oral
and written comments on the MSL
DEIS. Two meetings were held on
September 27, 2006, at the Florida Solar
Energy Center in Cocoa, Florida, and
one meeting was held on October 10,
2006, at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in
Washington, DC. NASA placed paid
advertisements announcing the dates,
times, and purpose of the public
meetings in local and regional
newspapers together with the full text of
NASA’s NOA in the legal notices
section of each newspaper. Members of
the public attending each meeting were
asked to register their attendance at the
meeting. However, registration was not
a requirement for anyone wishing to
present either oral or written comments.
Eleven members of the public registered
for the 1 p.m. meeting and seven
registered for the 6 p.m. meeting on
September 27 in Cocoa, Florida. Eleven
members of the public registered for the
meeting on October 10 in Washington,
DC. Excerpts of the official transcripts
taken by a court reporter during the
September 27 meetings, during which
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
three members of the public presented
oral comments, were included in the
FEIS as Appendix E; no oral comments
were presented during the October 10
meeting.
The EPA published a finding of no
objection (i.e., LO—Lack of Objection)
to the Proposed Action regarding
NASA’s DEIS in the Federal Register on
November 3, 2006 (71 FR 64701).
NASA published its NOA for the FEIS
in the Federal Register on November 21,
2006 (71 FR 67389), and mailed copies
to 119 Federal, State and local agencies,
organizations, and individuals. In
addition, NASA made the FEIS
available in electronic format on its Web
site and mailed the FEIS to commentors
on the DEIS. NASA sent e-mail
notifications to 23 individuals who had
submitted comments on the DEIS via email or had previously expressed
interest in the MSL mission. The EPA
published its NOA in the Federal
Register on November 24, 2006 (71 FR
67863), initiating the 30-day waiting
period, which ended on December 26,
2006. The EPA issued a finding of no
objection to the Proposed Action in the
FEIS on December 21, 2006. No
additional comments were received by
NASA during this period.
On December 27, 2006, NASA issued
a ROD to complete preparations for
launch of the proposed MSL mission
during September through November
2009 and to operate the mission using
an MMRTG as the primary power source
for the rover.
Key Environmental Issues Addressed in
the MSL EIS
Two key environmental issues
addressed in the MSL EIS were the air
emissions that would accompany
normal launch of the MSL spacecraft,
and the environmental consequences
associated with potential launch
accidents.
Environmental Consequences of a
Normal Launch
The primary environmental impacts
of a normal mission launch would be
associated with airborne emissions from
the strap-on solid rocket boosters that
would be used on the Atlas V launch
vehicle. Air emissions from the liquid
propellant engines on the Atlas V core
vehicle, although large in magnitude,
would be relatively inconsequential in
terms of environmental effects. The
effects of a normal launch would
include short-term adverse impacts on
air quality within the exhaust cloud at
and near the launch pad, and the
potential for acidic deposition from the
solid booster exhaust on the vegetation
and surface water bodies at and near the
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2011 / Notices
launch complex. Shortly after lift-off,
the exhaust cloud would be transported
downwind and upward, eventually
dissipating to background
concentrations. Because launches from
Cape Canaveral Air Force Station
(CCAFS) are relatively infrequent events
and winds rapidly disperse and dilute
the launch emissions to background
concentrations, no long-term adverse
impacts to air quality in offsite areas
would be anticipated. Surface waters in
the immediate area of the exhaust cloud
would temporarily acidify from
deposition of hydrogen chloride, but no
prolonged acidification or other longterm adverse effects would be
anticipated. Biota in the immediate
vicinity of the launch pad could be
damaged or killed by intense heat
following ignition and hydrogen
chloride deposition from the exhaust
cloud, but no long-term adverse effects
to biota would be anticipated. Neither
short-term nor long-term adverse
impacts to threatened or endangered
species would be expected. No
significant socioeconomic impacts
would be expected on nearby
communities, and no impacts would be
expected to cultural, historical, or
archeological resources as a result of the
MSL mission launch.
Some short-term ozone degradation
would occur along the flight path as the
Atlas V launch vehicle passes through
the stratosphere and deposits ozonedepleting chemicals from the exhaust
products of the solid rocket boosters.
However, the depletion trail from a
launch vehicle has been estimated to be
largely temporary, and is self-healing
within a few hours of the vehicle’s
passage. The total contribution to the
average annual depletion of ozone from
the launch of large expendable launch
vehicles with solid rocket boosters in a
given year has been estimated to be
small (approximately 0.014 percent per
year). Because launches at CCAFS are
always separated by at least a few days,
combined impacts in the sense of holes
in the ozone layer combining or
reinforcing one another cannot occur.
Launch of the Atlas V for the MSL
mission would produce a very small
fraction (less than 0.00001 percent) of
the annual net greenhouse gases emitted
by the United States. Therefore, launch
of the mission would not be anticipated
to substantially contribute to the
accumulation of greenhouse gases.
Environmental Consequences of
Potential Accidents
Radiological Considerations
Consideration of launch accidents
involving radiological consequences
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Jan 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
was a principal focus of the MSL EIS.
As described in the MSL EIS, depending
upon the sequence of events, some
launch accidents could result in release
of some of the plutonium dioxide
(PuO2) contained in the MMRTG, which
could have adverse impacts on human
health and the environment.Results of
the DOE risk assessment for the EIS
showed that the most likely outcome of
implementing the MSL mission would
be a successful launch with no release
of radioactive materials. For most
launch-related problems that could
occur prior to launch, the most likely
result would be a safe hold or
termination of the launch countdown.
The EIS risk assessment did, however,
identify potential launch accidents that,
although unlikely, could result in a
release of PuO2 in the launch area,
southern Africa following suborbital
reentry and other global locations
following orbital reentry.
For those postulated accidents with a
release which could occur in and near
the launch area, the predicted mean
radiological dose to the maximally
exposed individual was about 0.14 rem,
which is the equivalent of about 40
percent of the normal annual
background dose received by each
member of the U.S. population during a
year. No short-term radiological effects
would be expected from any of these
exposures. Each exposure would,
however, increase the statistical
likelihood of a cancer fatality over the
long term. For such unlikely accidents
with a release, additional latent cancer
fatalities are predicted to be small. (i.e.,
a mean of 0.4 additional latent cancer
fatalities among the potentially exposed
members of the local population near
the launch area, and a mean of 0.2
additional latent cancer fatalities among
potentially exposed members of the
global population). These estimates of
health consequences assumed no
mitigation actions, such as sheltering
and exclusion of people from
contaminated land areas.
Potential environmental
contamination was evaluated in terms of
land area exceeding various screening
levels and dose-rate related criteria.
Results of the MSL EIS risk assessment
indicated that a potential, but unlikely
launch area accident, involving the
intentional destruction of all launch
vehicle stages freeing the MMRTG to fall
to the ground, could result in about six
square kilometers (about two square
miles) potentially contaminated above
the 0.2 μCi/m2 screening level.
Less likely launch accidents were also
assessed. These events were postulated
for cases in which an accident occurs in
the launch area and the safety systems
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4135
fail to destroy the launch vehicle. The
mean probabilities of these events were
estimated to range from 1 in 8,000 to 1
in 800,000. These less likely accidents
could, however, expose the MMRTG to
severe accident environments, including
mechanical damage, fragments, and
solid propellant fires, and could result
in higher releases of PuO2 (up to 2
percent of the MMRTG inventory) with
the corresponding potential for higher
consequences. The maximally exposed
individual could receive a mean dose
ranging from a fraction of one rem up
to about 30 rem following the more
severe types of less likely accidents,
such as ground impact of the entire
launch vehicle, which are considered to
be very unlikely (i.e., probabilities
ranging from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 1
million). Assuming no mitigation
actions, such as sheltering and
exclusion of people from contaminated
land areas, radiation doses to the
potentially exposed members of the
population from a very unlikely launch
accident could result in up to 60 mean
additional cancer fatalities over the long
term.
For the very unlikely accident that
involved ground impact of the entire
launch vehicle, roughly 90 square
kilometers (about 35 square miles) of
land area could be contaminated above
the 0.2 μCi/m2 screening level.
Contamination at this level could
necessitate radiological surveys and
potential mitigation and cleanup
actions.
Non-Radiological Considerations
The two non-radiological accidents of
greatest concern would be a liquid
propellant spill during fueling
operations and a launch vehicle failure.
A liquid propellant spill during fueling
operations would not be expected to
result in any public health impacts or
any long-term environmental
consequences. Fueling operations for
the Atlas V involve rocket propellant-1
(a form of kerosene), liquid hydrogen,
liquid oxygen, and hydrazine. Launch
preparation activities at CCAFS are
subject to environmental regulations,
including spill prevention and response
requirements, and U.S. Air Force
(USAF) and launch service contractor
safety requirements specify detailed
policies and procedures to be followed
to ensure worker and public safety
during all liquid propellant fueling
operations. Spill containment would be
in place prior to any propellant transfer
to capture any potential release.
A launch vehicle failure on or near
the launch area during the first few
seconds of flight could result in the
release of the propellants (solid and
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
4136
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2011 / Notices
liquid) onboard the Atlas V and the
spacecraft. The resulting emissions
would resemble those from a normal
launch, consisting principally of carbon
monoxide, carbon dioxide, hydrogen
chloride, oxides of nitrogen, and
aluminum oxide from the combusted
propellants. A launch vehicle failure
would result in the prompt combustion
of a portion of the released liquid
propellants, depending on the degree of
mixing and ignition sources associated
with the accident, and somewhat slower
burning of the solid propellant
fragments. Falling debris would be
expected to land on or near the launch
pad resulting in potential secondary
ground-level explosions and localized
fires. After the launch vehicle clears
land, debris from an accident would be
expected to fall over the Atlantic Ocean.
Modeling of accident consequences
with meteorological parameters that
would result in the greatest
concentrations of emissions over land
areas indicates that the emissions would
not reach levels threatening public
health. Some burning solid and liquid
propellants could enter surface water
bodies and the ocean, resulting in shortterm, localized degradation of water
quality and conditions toxic to aquatic
life. Such chemicals entering the ocean
would be rapidly dispersed and
buffered, resulting in little long-term
adverse impact on water quality and
resident biota.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Reconsideration of Environmental
Issues in Light of Up to Date Mission
Information and the Proposed 2011
Launch of MSL
Radiological Considerations
DOE’s risk assessment for the MSL
EIS was developed during the time
when the candidate launch vehicles
being considered by NASA for the MSL
mission were the Atlas V 541 and the
Delta IV Heavy, prior to NASA’s
selection of the Atlas V 541. A
composite approach was taken in the
risk assessment in which results for
representative configurations of the
Atlas V 541 and Delta IV Heavy launch
vehicles were combined in a
probability-weighted manner to derive
accident probabilities, potential releases
of PuO2 in case of an accident,
radiological consequences, and mission
risks. Differences in the two launch
vehicles in terms of design, accident
probabilities and accident environments
were taken into account in developing
composite results.
For the MSL EIS, radiological impacts
or consequences for each postulated
accident were calculated in terms of: (1)
Impacts to individuals in terms of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Jan 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
maximum individual dose (the largest
expected dose that any person could
receive for a particular accident); (2)
impacts to the exposed portion of the
population in terms of the potential for
additional latent cancer fatalities due to
a radioactive release (i.e., cancer
fatalities that are in excess of those
latent cancer fatalities which the general
population would normally experience
from all causes over a long-term period
following the release); and (3) impacts
to the environment in terms of land area
contaminated at or above specified
levels.
In considering the launch of the MSL
mission during late 2011, NASA
identified factors that might have an
impact on the environmental
consequences described in the existing
EIS. DOE in cooperation with NASA
evaluated their risk assessment
supporting the EIS against up to date
information regarding the MSL mission
and use of the 2011 launch opportunity.
Factors in that evaluation included the
launch vehicle selection, duration and
time of the launch period, meteorology
for the launch period, launch
trajectories, and ground processing of
the launch vehicle.
DOE evaluated the changes associated
with the 2011 launch in terms of
potential changes in (1) impacts to
individuals in terms of the maximum
individual dose; (2) impacts to the
exposed portion of the population in
terms of the potential for additional
latent cancer fatalities due to a
radioactive release; and (3) impacts to
the environment in terms of land area
contaminated at or above specified
levels. DOE documented the results of
this evaluation and provided the results
to NASA. DOE’s conclusion is that the
updated results are consistent with
results reported in the MSL FEIS and
summarized in the 2006 MSL ROD and
the preceding section of this ROD.
Non-Radiological Considerations
The non-radiological environmental
impacts from a normal launch in 2011
also remain unchanged from those
expected for the 2009 launch
opportunity.
Similarly, expected non-radiological
impacts associated with potential
launch accidents are also unchanged
from those for the 2009 launch
opportunity. However, because there
has been some recent heightened
general interest in the non-radiological
hazards associated with reentering
space objects, the following additional
information is provided.
Consistent with the FEIS, after the
launch vehicle clears land, debris from
an accident including the MSL
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
spacecraft, would be expected to fall
over the Atlantic Ocean. Under certain
launch accident conditions, there is a
small probability the spacecraft with a
full propellant load (475 kg) could
reenter prior to achieving orbit and
impact land in southern Africa or
Madagascar. The probability of such an
accident occurring and leading to a land
impact is on the order of 1 in 20,000. As
indicated in the FEIS, the MSL
spacecraft’s propellant is hydrazine. The
overall risk of an individual injury
resulting from the land impact of a
spacecraft and exposure to hydrazine is
less than one in 100,000.
In other potential accident scenarios
(i.e., those occurring after achievement
of the park orbit), the spacecraft could
reenter from orbit, potentially impacting
land anywhere between 36° north or
south of the equator. Under these
conditions, only a small portion (i.e.
less than about 5%) of the full
propellant load could reach the ground
if the tanks did not burst due to reentry
heating effects and release their contents
into the atmosphere. The overall
probability of this type of accident
occurring is less than 1 in 200. In this
type of accident it is extremely unlikely
that there would be any hydrazine
residual remaining inside the propellant
tanks at the point of ground impact.
Incomplete and Unavailable
Information
As is typical for complex, long lead
time NASA missions such as MSL,
several technical issues that could affect
the results summarized in this modified
ROD will undergo continuing
evaluation as a part of a more detailed
safety analysis and as part of other nonmission specific test and analysis work
by NASA and DOE. Issues that continue
to be evaluated include:
• The solid propellant fire
environment and its potential effect on
the release of PuO2 from an MMRTG,
• The behavior of solid PuO2 and
PuO2 vapor in the fire environment and
the potential for PuO2 vapor to permeate
the graphite components in an MMRTG,
• The mechanical response of the
MMRTG for the mission-specific
configuration of the MSL mission, and
• The risks (i.e., probabilities and
effects) from release of spacecraft and
launch vehicle propellants in various
launch accident scenarios.
Results from these ongoing analyses
and tests are not anticipated to
substantively affect the environmental
evaluations summarized in this
modified ROD. However, NASA will
review such results as they become
available and will consider their
potential effects on the MSL
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 15 / Monday, January 24, 2011 / Notices
environmental impact analyses and, as
appropriate, the need for additional
MSL environmental documentation.
Conclusion
Based on CEQ regulations,
specifically 40 CFR 1502.9(c)(1), the two
situations in which an agency must
issue a supplemental EIS are: (i)
Substantial changes in the proposed
action that are relevant to
environmental concerns or (ii)
significant new circumstances or
information relevant to environmental
concerns associated with the proposed
action. Using these criteria, NASA has
evaluated its updated MSL mission
information, including the changes to
the mission associated with a 2011
launch opportunity and further
considered DOE’s evaluation of the
existing EIS risk assessment. Based
upon these evaluations, NASA has
concluded there are no substantial
changes relevant to environmental
concerns associated with the updated
mission information and change in
launch opportunity from 2009 to 2011.
NASA has further concluded there are
no significant new circumstances or
information relevant to environmental
concerns associated with the updated
mission information and change in
launch opportunity from 2009 to 2011.
Decision
Based upon all of the forgoing,
including consideration of the 2006
Record of Decision, it is my decision to
complete development and preparations
for launch of the proposed MSL mission
during November–December 2011, and
to operate the mission using an MMRTG
as the primary power source for the
rover.
Edward J. Weiler, NASA Science
Mission Directorate (SMD) Associate
Administrator
Signed: August 23, 2010
Dated: January 14, 2011.
Charles J. Gay,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Science
Mission Directorate.
[FR Doc. 2011–1366 Filed 1–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
to request clearance of this collection. In
accordance with the requirement of
Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, we are providing
opportunity for public comment on this
action.
After obtaining and considering
public comment, NSF will prepare the
submission requesting OMB clearance
of this collection for no longer than 3
years.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information shall
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of
the Agency’s estimate of the burden of
the proposed collection of information;
(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information on
respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology;
and (d) ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
DATES: Written comments should be
received by March 25, 2011 to be
assured of consideration. Comments
received after that date will be
considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: Written comments
regarding the information collection and
requests for copies of the proposed
information collection request should be
addressed to Suzanne Plimpton, Reports
Clearance Officer, National Science
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Rm.
295, Arlington, VA 22230, or by e-mail
to splimpto@nsf.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Suzanne Plimpton on (703) 292–7556 or
send e-mail to splimpto@nsf.gov.
Individuals who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time,
Monday through Friday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title of Collection: Innovative
Technology Experiences for Students
and Teachers (ITEST) Program.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Evaluation for the National Science
Foundation
Comment Request: Innovative
Technology Experiences for Students
and Teachers (ITEST) Program
OMB Number: 3145–NEW.
Expiration Date of Approval: Not
applicable.
Type of request: Initial Clearance.
National Science Foundation.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The National Science
Foundation (NSF) is announcing plans
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Jan 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
Abstract
Innovative Technology Experiences
for Students and Teachers (ITEST) is a
National Science Foundation program
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4137
that responds to current concerns and
projections about the growing demand
for professionals and information
technology workers in the U.S. and
seeks solutions to help ensure the
breadth and depth of the STEM
workforce. Information technologies are
integral to both the workplace and
everyday activities of most Americans.
They are part of how people learn, how
they interact with each other and
information, and how they represent
and understand their world. Attaining a
basic understanding of these
technologies and mastery of essential
technical skills is a requirement for
anyone to benefit from innovation in the
modern world. The technological
growth of the nation depends on a
technologically literate citizenry. ITEST
is designed to increase the opportunities
for students and teachers to learn about,
experience, and use information
technologies within the context of
science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM), including
Information Technology (IT) courses.
Supported projects are intended to
provide opportunities for K–12 children
and teachers to build the skills and
knowledge needed to advance their
study, and to function and to contribute
in a technologically rich society.
Additionally, exposure to engaging
applications of IT is a means to
stimulate student interest in the field
and an important precursor to the
academic preparation needed to pursue
IT careers.
The ITEST program evaluation will
characterize the variety of ITEST
projects, measure the rigor of individual
project evaluations, estimate outcomes
for students and teachers involved in a
sample of projects, and identify
exemplary project models. In order to
accomplish these tasks, the ITEST
program evaluation will employ a
mixed-method approach including case
studies, quasi-experiments, and
extensive document review. This
information collection request will
include a series of protocols to be used
while conducting site visit interviews, a
list of documents to be requested during
visits, and a student-survey instrument
to measure project outcomes.
Estimate of Burden
Respondents: Individuals.
Frequency: Annual.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
1,402.
Estimated Burden Hours on
Respondents: 1,052 hours.
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 15 (Monday, January 24, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4133-4137]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1366]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice (11-008)]
National Environmental Policy Act; Mars Science Laboratory (MSL)
Mission
AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Notice of Modified Record of Decision (ROD) for MSL Final
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, as amended,
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality
Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR
parts 1500-1508), and NASA's NEPA policy and procedures (14 CFR part
1216, subpart 1216.3), NASA prepared and issued the Final EIS for the
proposed MSL Mission. A ROD was issued on December 27, 2006 indicating
NASA's decision to prepare and launch the MSL Mission in 2009. A copy
of the Final EIS and ROD are available at the following Web site:
https://science.nasa.gov/missions/msl/. NASA was unable to finish
preparation of the MSL Mission in time for the 2009 launch opportunity,
and NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Associate Administrator
issued a modified ROD indicating NASA's decision to complete
preparation and launch the MSL mission in 2011. The full text of the
modified ROD is provided below.
DATES: Effective Date: January 24, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Additional information about NASA's
MSL Mission is available on the MSL Mission Web site at https://science.nasa.gov/missions/msl/. Agency Point of Contact: Mr. Dave
Lavery, Planetary Science Division, Science Mission Directorate, NASA
Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546-0001, telephone 202-358-4800, or
electronic mail dave.lavery@nasa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Modified Record of Decision: NASA MSL Mission
This modified Record of Decision (ROD) documents NASA's
consideration of possible changes in the potential environmental
impacts of the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) mission with the launch
postponed from the original 2009 launch opportunity to the next
available launch opportunity in 2011.
This document modifies the ROD issued for the MSL mission on
December 27, 2006. In 2006, NASA decided to complete preparations for
launch of the MSL mission during a September to November 2009 launch
period and to operate the mission using a Multi-Mission Radioisotope
Thermoelectric Generator (MMRTG) as the primary power source for the
rover. However, in December 2008, NASA made a determination that the
MSL rover could not be ready in time for the original 2009 launch
window because of unexpected spacecraft technical and testing
challenges. Launch opportunities for Mars missions occur approximately
every 26 months; consequently, the next launch opportunity is November
to December 2011. NASA is continuing preparations for launch of the MSL
mission during this next launch opportunity.
In considering the launch of the MSL mission during late 2011, NASA
identified factors that might affect the environmental impact analysis
presented in the existing Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
for the MSL mission. The Department of Energy (DOE) helped NASA
reassess potential radiological impacts by evaluating the nuclear risk
described in the 2006 FEIS against up to date
[[Page 4134]]
information regarding the MSL mission and use of the 2011 launch
opportunity. Factors included in this evaluation included the launch
vehicle selection, duration and time of the launch period, meteorology
for the launch period, launch trajectories, and ground processing of
the launch vehicle. NASA also reassessed the non-radiological
environmental impacts discussed in the FEIS against up to date
information regarding the MSL mission. Factors included in this
evaluation included updated information concerning spacecraft
trajectories and potential reentry accidents and environments.
Background (Purpose and Need for the Proposed Mission)
The purpose of the MSL mission is to both conduct comprehensive
science on the surface of Mars and demonstrate technological
advancements in the exploration of Mars. As described in the 2006 FEIS,
the mission's overall scientific goals are: (1) Assess the biological
potential of at least one selected site on Mars; (2) characterize the
geology and geochemistry of the landing region at all appropriate
spatial scales; (3) investigate planetary processes of relevance to
past habitability; and (4) characterize the broad spectrum of the
Martian surface radiation environment. The objectives planned for the
mission are described in the December 27, 2006, NASA Record of Decision
for the MSL mission.
History of MSL NEPA Compliance Activities
NASA prepared an environmental impact statement (EIS) to analyze
the potential environmental impacts of the planned MSL mission. The DOE
was a cooperating agency in the EIS because the Proposed Action would
use a DOE-developed and owned radioisotope power system (RPS),
specifically the MMRTG, to provide electrical power for the MSL rover.
On March 10, 2006, NASA published a Notice of Intent in the Federal
Register (71 FR 12402) to prepare an EIS and conduct scoping for the
MSL mission. Public input and comments on alternatives, potential
environmental impacts and concerns associated with the proposed MSL
mission were requested. The scoping period ended on April 24, 2006. One
scoping comment was received during this period from a Federal agency
expressing concerns regarding habitat management of threatened and
endangered species near the MSL launch site at Cape Canaveral Air Force
Station (CCAFS), Florida. These concerns were addressed in the Draft
EIS (DEIS).
NASA published a Notice of Availability (NOA) of the DEIS for the
MSL mission in the Federal Register on September 5, 2006 (71 FR 52347).
The DEIS was mailed by NASA to 59 potentially interested Federal, State
and local agencies, organizations and individuals. In addition, the
DEIS was publicly available in electronic format on NASA's Web site.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published its NOA for
the DEIS in the Federal Register on September 8, 2006 (71 FR 53093),
initiating the 45-day review and comment period.
The public review and comment period closed on October 23, 2006.
NASA received ten comment submissions (letters and other written
comments) from three Federal agencies, one State agency, one private
organization, and five individuals. The comments received included ``no
comment'', requests for clarification of specific sections of text, and
objections to the use of nuclear material for space missions. In
addition, NASA received a total of 34 comment submissions via
electronic mail (e-mail) from 32 individuals. These comment submissions
include objections to the use of nuclear material for space missions,
and general support for the proposed MSL mission. These comments were
considered in developing the FEIS, and responses to these comments were
prepared and included in the FEIS as Appendix D.
In addition to soliciting comments for submittal by letter and e-
mail, NASA held three meetings during which the public was invited to
provide both oral and written comments on the MSL DEIS. Two meetings
were held on September 27, 2006, at the Florida Solar Energy Center in
Cocoa, Florida, and one meeting was held on October 10, 2006, at the
Hyatt Regency Hotel in Washington, DC. NASA placed paid advertisements
announcing the dates, times, and purpose of the public meetings in
local and regional newspapers together with the full text of NASA's NOA
in the legal notices section of each newspaper. Members of the public
attending each meeting were asked to register their attendance at the
meeting. However, registration was not a requirement for anyone wishing
to present either oral or written comments. Eleven members of the
public registered for the 1 p.m. meeting and seven registered for the 6
p.m. meeting on September 27 in Cocoa, Florida. Eleven members of the
public registered for the meeting on October 10 in Washington, DC.
Excerpts of the official transcripts taken by a court reporter during
the September 27 meetings, during which three members of the public
presented oral comments, were included in the FEIS as Appendix E; no
oral comments were presented during the October 10 meeting.
The EPA published a finding of no objection (i.e., LO--Lack of
Objection) to the Proposed Action regarding NASA's DEIS in the Federal
Register on November 3, 2006 (71 FR 64701).
NASA published its NOA for the FEIS in the Federal Register on
November 21, 2006 (71 FR 67389), and mailed copies to 119 Federal,
State and local agencies, organizations, and individuals. In addition,
NASA made the FEIS available in electronic format on its Web site and
mailed the FEIS to commentors on the DEIS. NASA sent e-mail
notifications to 23 individuals who had submitted comments on the DEIS
via e-mail or had previously expressed interest in the MSL mission. The
EPA published its NOA in the Federal Register on November 24, 2006 (71
FR 67863), initiating the 30-day waiting period, which ended on
December 26, 2006. The EPA issued a finding of no objection to the
Proposed Action in the FEIS on December 21, 2006. No additional
comments were received by NASA during this period.
On December 27, 2006, NASA issued a ROD to complete preparations
for launch of the proposed MSL mission during September through
November 2009 and to operate the mission using an MMRTG as the primary
power source for the rover.
Key Environmental Issues Addressed in the MSL EIS
Two key environmental issues addressed in the MSL EIS were the air
emissions that would accompany normal launch of the MSL spacecraft, and
the environmental consequences associated with potential launch
accidents.
Environmental Consequences of a Normal Launch
The primary environmental impacts of a normal mission launch would
be associated with airborne emissions from the strap-on solid rocket
boosters that would be used on the Atlas V launch vehicle. Air
emissions from the liquid propellant engines on the Atlas V core
vehicle, although large in magnitude, would be relatively
inconsequential in terms of environmental effects. The effects of a
normal launch would include short-term adverse impacts on air quality
within the exhaust cloud at and near the launch pad, and the potential
for acidic deposition from the solid booster exhaust on the vegetation
and surface water bodies at and near the
[[Page 4135]]
launch complex. Shortly after lift-off, the exhaust cloud would be
transported downwind and upward, eventually dissipating to background
concentrations. Because launches from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station
(CCAFS) are relatively infrequent events and winds rapidly disperse and
dilute the launch emissions to background concentrations, no long-term
adverse impacts to air quality in offsite areas would be anticipated.
Surface waters in the immediate area of the exhaust cloud would
temporarily acidify from deposition of hydrogen chloride, but no
prolonged acidification or other long-term adverse effects would be
anticipated. Biota in the immediate vicinity of the launch pad could be
damaged or killed by intense heat following ignition and hydrogen
chloride deposition from the exhaust cloud, but no long-term adverse
effects to biota would be anticipated. Neither short-term nor long-term
adverse impacts to threatened or endangered species would be expected.
No significant socioeconomic impacts would be expected on nearby
communities, and no impacts would be expected to cultural, historical,
or archeological resources as a result of the MSL mission launch.
Some short-term ozone degradation would occur along the flight path
as the Atlas V launch vehicle passes through the stratosphere and
deposits ozone-depleting chemicals from the exhaust products of the
solid rocket boosters. However, the depletion trail from a launch
vehicle has been estimated to be largely temporary, and is self-healing
within a few hours of the vehicle's passage. The total contribution to
the average annual depletion of ozone from the launch of large
expendable launch vehicles with solid rocket boosters in a given year
has been estimated to be small (approximately 0.014 percent per year).
Because launches at CCAFS are always separated by at least a few days,
combined impacts in the sense of holes in the ozone layer combining or
reinforcing one another cannot occur.
Launch of the Atlas V for the MSL mission would produce a very
small fraction (less than 0.00001 percent) of the annual net greenhouse
gases emitted by the United States. Therefore, launch of the mission
would not be anticipated to substantially contribute to the
accumulation of greenhouse gases.
Environmental Consequences of Potential Accidents
Radiological Considerations
Consideration of launch accidents involving radiological
consequences was a principal focus of the MSL EIS. As described in the
MSL EIS, depending upon the sequence of events, some launch accidents
could result in release of some of the plutonium dioxide
(PuO2) contained in the MMRTG, which could have adverse
impacts on human health and the environment.Results of the DOE risk
assessment for the EIS showed that the most likely outcome of
implementing the MSL mission would be a successful launch with no
release of radioactive materials. For most launch-related problems that
could occur prior to launch, the most likely result would be a safe
hold or termination of the launch countdown.
The EIS risk assessment did, however, identify potential launch
accidents that, although unlikely, could result in a release of
PuO2 in the launch area, southern Africa following
suborbital reentry and other global locations following orbital
reentry.
For those postulated accidents with a release which could occur in
and near the launch area, the predicted mean radiological dose to the
maximally exposed individual was about 0.14 rem, which is the
equivalent of about 40 percent of the normal annual background dose
received by each member of the U.S. population during a year. No short-
term radiological effects would be expected from any of these
exposures. Each exposure would, however, increase the statistical
likelihood of a cancer fatality over the long term. For such unlikely
accidents with a release, additional latent cancer fatalities are
predicted to be small. (i.e., a mean of 0.4 additional latent cancer
fatalities among the potentially exposed members of the local
population near the launch area, and a mean of 0.2 additional latent
cancer fatalities among potentially exposed members of the global
population). These estimates of health consequences assumed no
mitigation actions, such as sheltering and exclusion of people from
contaminated land areas.
Potential environmental contamination was evaluated in terms of
land area exceeding various screening levels and dose-rate related
criteria. Results of the MSL EIS risk assessment indicated that a
potential, but unlikely launch area accident, involving the intentional
destruction of all launch vehicle stages freeing the MMRTG to fall to
the ground, could result in about six square kilometers (about two
square miles) potentially contaminated above the 0.2 [mu]Ci/m\2\
screening level.
Less likely launch accidents were also assessed. These events were
postulated for cases in which an accident occurs in the launch area and
the safety systems fail to destroy the launch vehicle. The mean
probabilities of these events were estimated to range from 1 in 8,000
to 1 in 800,000. These less likely accidents could, however, expose the
MMRTG to severe accident environments, including mechanical damage,
fragments, and solid propellant fires, and could result in higher
releases of PuO2 (up to 2 percent of the MMRTG inventory)
with the corresponding potential for higher consequences. The maximally
exposed individual could receive a mean dose ranging from a fraction of
one rem up to about 30 rem following the more severe types of less
likely accidents, such as ground impact of the entire launch vehicle,
which are considered to be very unlikely (i.e., probabilities ranging
from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 1 million). Assuming no mitigation actions,
such as sheltering and exclusion of people from contaminated land
areas, radiation doses to the potentially exposed members of the
population from a very unlikely launch accident could result in up to
60 mean additional cancer fatalities over the long term.
For the very unlikely accident that involved ground impact of the
entire launch vehicle, roughly 90 square kilometers (about 35 square
miles) of land area could be contaminated above the 0.2 [mu]Ci/m\2\
screening level. Contamination at this level could necessitate
radiological surveys and potential mitigation and cleanup actions.
Non-Radiological Considerations
The two non-radiological accidents of greatest concern would be a
liquid propellant spill during fueling operations and a launch vehicle
failure. A liquid propellant spill during fueling operations would not
be expected to result in any public health impacts or any long-term
environmental consequences. Fueling operations for the Atlas V involve
rocket propellant-1 (a form of kerosene), liquid hydrogen, liquid
oxygen, and hydrazine. Launch preparation activities at CCAFS are
subject to environmental regulations, including spill prevention and
response requirements, and U.S. Air Force (USAF) and launch service
contractor safety requirements specify detailed policies and procedures
to be followed to ensure worker and public safety during all liquid
propellant fueling operations. Spill containment would be in place
prior to any propellant transfer to capture any potential release.
A launch vehicle failure on or near the launch area during the
first few seconds of flight could result in the release of the
propellants (solid and
[[Page 4136]]
liquid) onboard the Atlas V and the spacecraft. The resulting emissions
would resemble those from a normal launch, consisting principally of
carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, hydrogen chloride, oxides of nitrogen,
and aluminum oxide from the combusted propellants. A launch vehicle
failure would result in the prompt combustion of a portion of the
released liquid propellants, depending on the degree of mixing and
ignition sources associated with the accident, and somewhat slower
burning of the solid propellant fragments. Falling debris would be
expected to land on or near the launch pad resulting in potential
secondary ground-level explosions and localized fires. After the launch
vehicle clears land, debris from an accident would be expected to fall
over the Atlantic Ocean. Modeling of accident consequences with
meteorological parameters that would result in the greatest
concentrations of emissions over land areas indicates that the
emissions would not reach levels threatening public health. Some
burning solid and liquid propellants could enter surface water bodies
and the ocean, resulting in short-term, localized degradation of water
quality and conditions toxic to aquatic life. Such chemicals entering
the ocean would be rapidly dispersed and buffered, resulting in little
long-term adverse impact on water quality and resident biota.
Reconsideration of Environmental Issues in Light of Up to Date Mission
Information and the Proposed 2011 Launch of MSL
Radiological Considerations
DOE's risk assessment for the MSL EIS was developed during the time
when the candidate launch vehicles being considered by NASA for the MSL
mission were the Atlas V 541 and the Delta IV Heavy, prior to NASA's
selection of the Atlas V 541. A composite approach was taken in the
risk assessment in which results for representative configurations of
the Atlas V 541 and Delta IV Heavy launch vehicles were combined in a
probability-weighted manner to derive accident probabilities, potential
releases of PuO2 in case of an accident, radiological
consequences, and mission risks. Differences in the two launch vehicles
in terms of design, accident probabilities and accident environments
were taken into account in developing composite results.
For the MSL EIS, radiological impacts or consequences for each
postulated accident were calculated in terms of: (1) Impacts to
individuals in terms of the maximum individual dose (the largest
expected dose that any person could receive for a particular accident);
(2) impacts to the exposed portion of the population in terms of the
potential for additional latent cancer fatalities due to a radioactive
release (i.e., cancer fatalities that are in excess of those latent
cancer fatalities which the general population would normally
experience from all causes over a long-term period following the
release); and (3) impacts to the environment in terms of land area
contaminated at or above specified levels.
In considering the launch of the MSL mission during late 2011, NASA
identified factors that might have an impact on the environmental
consequences described in the existing EIS. DOE in cooperation with
NASA evaluated their risk assessment supporting the EIS against up to
date information regarding the MSL mission and use of the 2011 launch
opportunity. Factors in that evaluation included the launch vehicle
selection, duration and time of the launch period, meteorology for the
launch period, launch trajectories, and ground processing of the launch
vehicle.
DOE evaluated the changes associated with the 2011 launch in terms
of potential changes in (1) impacts to individuals in terms of the
maximum individual dose; (2) impacts to the exposed portion of the
population in terms of the potential for additional latent cancer
fatalities due to a radioactive release; and (3) impacts to the
environment in terms of land area contaminated at or above specified
levels. DOE documented the results of this evaluation and provided the
results to NASA. DOE's conclusion is that the updated results are
consistent with results reported in the MSL FEIS and summarized in the
2006 MSL ROD and the preceding section of this ROD.
Non-Radiological Considerations
The non-radiological environmental impacts from a normal launch in
2011 also remain unchanged from those expected for the 2009 launch
opportunity.
Similarly, expected non-radiological impacts associated with
potential launch accidents are also unchanged from those for the 2009
launch opportunity. However, because there has been some recent
heightened general interest in the non-radiological hazards associated
with reentering space objects, the following additional information is
provided.
Consistent with the FEIS, after the launch vehicle clears land,
debris from an accident including the MSL spacecraft, would be expected
to fall over the Atlantic Ocean. Under certain launch accident
conditions, there is a small probability the spacecraft with a full
propellant load (475 kg) could reenter prior to achieving orbit and
impact land in southern Africa or Madagascar. The probability of such
an accident occurring and leading to a land impact is on the order of 1
in 20,000. As indicated in the FEIS, the MSL spacecraft's propellant is
hydrazine. The overall risk of an individual injury resulting from the
land impact of a spacecraft and exposure to hydrazine is less than one
in 100,000.
In other potential accident scenarios (i.e., those occurring after
achievement of the park orbit), the spacecraft could reenter from
orbit, potentially impacting land anywhere between 36[deg] north or
south of the equator. Under these conditions, only a small portion
(i.e. less than about 5%) of the full propellant load could reach the
ground if the tanks did not burst due to reentry heating effects and
release their contents into the atmosphere. The overall probability of
this type of accident occurring is less than 1 in 200. In this type of
accident it is extremely unlikely that there would be any hydrazine
residual remaining inside the propellant tanks at the point of ground
impact.
Incomplete and Unavailable Information
As is typical for complex, long lead time NASA missions such as
MSL, several technical issues that could affect the results summarized
in this modified ROD will undergo continuing evaluation as a part of a
more detailed safety analysis and as part of other non-mission specific
test and analysis work by NASA and DOE. Issues that continue to be
evaluated include:
The solid propellant fire environment and its potential
effect on the release of PuO2 from an MMRTG,
The behavior of solid PuO2 and PuO2
vapor in the fire environment and the potential for PuO2
vapor to permeate the graphite components in an MMRTG,
The mechanical response of the MMRTG for the mission-
specific configuration of the MSL mission, and
The risks (i.e., probabilities and effects) from release
of spacecraft and launch vehicle propellants in various launch accident
scenarios.
Results from these ongoing analyses and tests are not anticipated
to substantively affect the environmental evaluations summarized in
this modified ROD. However, NASA will review such results as they
become available and will consider their potential effects on the MSL
[[Page 4137]]
environmental impact analyses and, as appropriate, the need for
additional MSL environmental documentation.
Conclusion
Based on CEQ regulations, specifically 40 CFR 1502.9(c)(1), the two
situations in which an agency must issue a supplemental EIS are: (i)
Substantial changes in the proposed action that are relevant to
environmental concerns or (ii) significant new circumstances or
information relevant to environmental concerns associated with the
proposed action. Using these criteria, NASA has evaluated its updated
MSL mission information, including the changes to the mission
associated with a 2011 launch opportunity and further considered DOE's
evaluation of the existing EIS risk assessment. Based upon these
evaluations, NASA has concluded there are no substantial changes
relevant to environmental concerns associated with the updated mission
information and change in launch opportunity from 2009 to 2011. NASA
has further concluded there are no significant new circumstances or
information relevant to environmental concerns associated with the
updated mission information and change in launch opportunity from 2009
to 2011.
Decision
Based upon all of the forgoing, including consideration of the 2006
Record of Decision, it is my decision to complete development and
preparations for launch of the proposed MSL mission during November-
December 2011, and to operate the mission using an MMRTG as the primary
power source for the rover.
Edward J. Weiler, NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Associate
Administrator
Signed: August 23, 2010
Dated: January 14, 2011.
Charles J. Gay,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Science Mission Directorate.
[FR Doc. 2011-1366 Filed 1-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P