Proposed Finding of No Significant Impact

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. 29208]

Proposed Finding of No Significant Impact

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Proposed finding of no significant impact; Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA), evaluating

a Sea Launch Limited

[[Page 20241]]

Partnership (SLLP) proposal to construct and operate a mobile, floating

launch platform in international waters in the east-central equatorial

Pacific Ocean. After reviewing and analyzing currently available data

and information on existing conditions, project impacts, and measures

to mitigate those impacts, the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA),

Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation (AST)

proposes to determine that licensing the operation of the proposed

launch activities is not a major Federal action that would

significantly affect the quality of the human environment within the

meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969.

Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

would not be required and AST is proposing to issue a Finding of No

Significant Impact (FONSI).

FOR A COPY OF THE SEA LAUNCH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CONTACT: Mr.

Nikos Himaras, FAA, Associate Administrator for Commercial Space

Transportation, Suite 331/AST-100, 800 Independence Ave., S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20591; phone (202) 267-7926, or refer to the following

Internet address: http://ast.faa.gov

DATES: There will be a thirty (30) day comment period before the FAA

makes its final determination on the proposed FONSI. Interested

individuals, Government agencies, and private organizations are invited

to send comments on the proposed FONSI to the address set forth below

by May 26, 1998 by mail.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to, Docket Clerk, Docket No.

29208, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave., S.W.,

Room 915, Washington, D.C. 20591.

Proposed Action

If a foreign entity controlled by a U.S. citizen conducts a launch

outside the United States and outside the territory of a foreign

country, its launch must be licensed. 49 U.S.C. 70104(a)(3). The FAA

determined that SLLP is a foreign entity controlled by a U. S. Citizen,

Boeing Commercial Space Company. 49 U.S.C. 70102(1)(C); 14 CFR 401.5.

Because it proposes to launch in international waters, outside the

territory of the United States or a foreign country, SLLP must obtain

an FAA license to launch. Licensing a launch is a Federal action

requiring environmental analysis by the FAA in accordance with the

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. Upon

receipt of a completed application, the Associate Administrator for

Commercial Space Transportation must determine whether or not to issue

a license to SLLP to launch. Environmental findings are required for a

license evaluation. In this instance, the proposed action is the

licensing by the FAA of all possible launches by the SLLP at the

specified launch location.

SLLP proposes to conduct commercial space launch operations from a

mobile, floating platform in international waters in the east-central

equatorial Pacific Ocean. The SLLP is an international commercial

venture formed to launch commercial satellites. It is organized under

the laws of the Cayman Islands, BWI, and the partnership members are

Boeing Commercial Space Company of the United States, RSC Energia of

Russia, KB Yuzhnoye of the Ukraine, and Kvaerner Maritime a.s. of

Norway.

The SLLP would use a launch platform (LP) and an assembly and

command ship (ACS). A floating oil drilling platform is being

refurbished in Norway to serve as the self-propelled LP. The ACS is

being built in Scotland specifically for Sea Launch operations.

A Zenith-3 SL expendable launch vehicle fueled by Kerosene and

liquid oxygen would be the only launch vehicle used at the Sea Launch

facilities. In the first year of operation, SLLP intends to conduct two

launches. Six launches are proposed for each subsequent year. The

launches are proposed to occur at the equator in the vicinity of 154

degrees west to maximize inertial and other launch efficiencies. The

distances from South America (over 7,000 km) and from the nearest

inhabited island (340 km) are intended to ensure that stage one and

stage two would drop well away from land and coastal populated areas.

The FAA evaluated open sea areas, the Kiribati Islands, the

Galapagos Islands and the Home Port in Long Beach, California for

environmental impacts from the proposed launch activities. The

environmental study focused on Sea Launch activities conducted at the

launch location, activities that may impact the launch range during

nominal launches, and failed missions. Sea Launch payloads (i.e.,

commercial satellites) are not included in this evaluation because they

will be fueled and sealed at the Home Port and will only become

operational at an altitude of 35,000 km. The environmental study

incorporates by reference an environmental assessment conducted by the

Navy on the Home Port Facility which resulted in 1996 in a Finding of

No Significant Impact. Potential environmental impacts of payloads are

not discussed here except with regard to failed mission scenarios.

Environmental Impacts

Air Quality

Pre-launch activities that may impact air quality include LP and

ACS positioning, final equipment and process checks, coupling of fuel

lines to the integrated launch vehicle (ILV) prior to fueling, the

transfer of kerosene and liquid oxygen (LOX) fuels, and decoupling of

the fueling apparatus. Normal operations would result only in an

incidental loss of kerosene and LOX. This loss of vapors would

dissipate immediately and form smog. An unsuccessful ignition attempt

would result in automatic defueling of the ILV. Defueling would release

LOX vapor and approximately 70 kg of kerosene when the fuel line is

flushed. The LOX would dissipate and the vapor and kerosene would

evaporate, dissipate rapidly and degrade, thereby having little effect

on the surrounding environment.

Potential environmental impacts from launch activities would

include spent stages, residual fuels and combustion emissions released

into the atmosphere and ocean from spent stages, combustion emissions,

thermal energy and noise. During nominal launches, any impacts would be

distributed across the east-central equatorial pacific region in a

predictable manner. Kerosene released during descent of a failed launch

attempt would evaporate within minutes. Any residual liquid oxygen

would instantly evaporate without consequence.

The proposed launch location is relatively free of combustion

source emissions. That fact coupled with the size of the Pacific Ocean

and air space allows most launch emissions to dissipate rapidly. Launch

effects on the boundary layer up to two thousand meters would be short

term and cause minimal impacts. Emissions occurring in the boundary

layer would be dispersed away from inhabited islands by prevailing

easterly trade winds and local turbulence caused by solar heating.

Because dispersion occurs within hours, the planned six missions per

year would preclude any chance of cumulative effects.

All emissions to the troposphere would come from first stage

combustion of LOX and kerosene. Photochemical reactions involving Sea

Launch Zenit rocket emissions would form carbon dioxide

(CO2) and oxygenated organic compounds. Nitrogen oxide in

the exhaust trail would form nitric and nitrous acids. Cloud droplets

and atmospheric aerosols efficiently absorb

[[Page 20242]]

water-soluble compounds such as acids, oxygenated chemical compounds,

and oxidants, thereby reducing impacts to insignificant levels.

Approximately 36,100 kg of carbon monoxide (CO) would be released

into the troposphere during the first 55 seconds of flight resulting in

an estimated CO concentration at Christmas Island of 9.94 mg/m3. This

release is well below the Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 55 mg/m3, the Environmental

Protection Agency level of concern of 175 mg/m3 and the industry

Emergency Response Planning Guideline-2 of 400 mg/m3. Nitrogen

compounds in the exhaust trail of liquid propellant rockets would cause

a temporary reduction of ozone, with return to near background levels

within a few hours. Models and measurement of other space systems

comparable to Sea Launch indicate that these impacts would be

temporary, and the atmosphere is capable of replacing by migration or

regeneration the destroyed ozone within a few hours. The high-speed

movement of the Zenit-3L rocket and the re-entry of the stages after

their use may impact stratospheric ozone. The exact chemistry and

relative significance of these processes are not known but are believed

to be minimal.

Impacts to air quality would be minimal. Those impacts that do

occur would be of short duration and would naturally reverse themselves

over a short period of time.

Waste

Post-launch operations involve cleaning the launch platform for

subsequent launches. Cleaning would result in particulate residues

being washed from the LP with fresh water. Only a few kilograms of

debris and residues would be generated. These materials would be

collected and handled onboard as solid waste for later disposal at the

Home Port.

Noise

Noise from a launch is calculated at approximately 150 decibels at

378 meters with the equivalent sound intensity in the water estimated

at less than 75 decibels. Due to the small number of launches per year

and scarcity of higher trophic level organisms, noise impacts are

expected to be negligible.

Biological and Ecological Impacts

Pre-launch preparations include spraying fresh water from a tank on

the LP into the LP's flame bucket, which would dissipate heat and

absorb sound during the initial fuel burn. There would be minor impacts

to the ecosystem because of the input of heated freshwater. However,

the natural variation in plankton densities would ensure rapid and

timely recolonization of plankton in the water surrounding the LP.

Launch and flight activities may impact the ocean environment by

depositing spent stages and residual fuels. During nominal launches,

these impacts would occur and be distributed across the east-central

equatorial pacific region. It is unlikely that any falling debris would

impact animals, although a small number of marine organisms would be

impacted. Kerosene reaching the ocean would form a surface sheen

covering several square kilometers. Over 95% of the kerosene sheen

would evaporate from surface waters within hours with the remaining 5%

dispersing or degrading in a few days. Plankton immediately beneath the

kerosene slick would likely be killed. However, overall plankton

mortality would be minimal as the population densities are greatest

around 30 meters below the surface.

Two worst case scenarios were evaluated and determined to cause

only minimal damage to the environment. The first case evaluated ILV

failure and explosion on the LP with the ILV being fully fueled and

ready for launch. This failure would result in an explosion of the ILV

fuels scattering pieces of the LLV and LP up to 3 km away. Particulate

matter from the smoke plume would drift downwind and be distributed a

few kilometers before dissipating. Plankton and fish in the immediate

area would be killed over the course of several days. Thermal energy

would be deflected and absorbed by the ocean and 100% of the fuels

would be consumed or released into the atmosphere through combustion or

evaporation. Disruption to the atmosphere and the ocean would be

assimilated and the environment would return to pre-accident conditions

within several days.

The second scenario evaluated involved failure of the rocket's

upper stage. Loss and re-entry of the upper stage and payload would

result in materials and fuels being heated by friction and vaporizing.

Remaining objects would fall into the ocean causing a temporary

disruption as the warm objects cooled and sank. The risk of debris

striking any populated areas or ecological habitats is very remote.

Socioeconomics

The SLLP launch activities would occupy the launch location for two

to seven days during each launch cycle. Due to the brief period of time

that the LP and the ACS will be present at the launch location, social

and economic impacts to the Kiribati are considered negligible. The

brief duration of launch activities, and the relative degree of

isolation of the launch location provides a barrier between Sea Launch

and the cultural and economic character of the Kiribati society. The

baseline plan for operations does not include any use of facilities

based on any of the Kiribati Islands. Impacts to the Islands,

associated with employees transiting Christmas Island on an emergency

basis, would be positive given that the expenditures would be an

addition to the local economy.

Health and Safety

The FAA's licensing process will examine all safety-related aspects

of the proposed launch operations. The SLLP adopted a common risk

value, an upper limit of one in a million casualty expectations, as the

population protection criteria. Public Safety assurance and analysis

issues are discussed in the SLLP document ``Sea Launch System Safety

Plan''. The launch location was shifted away from South America to

ensure that stage one, the fairing, and stage two would drop well away

from land and coastal commercial activity. The instantaneous impact

point speed would increase over South America, decreasing the dwell

time and potential risk as the rocket traverses land. The launch area,

in the vicinity of 154 degrees west, was selected because it is located

outside of the Kiribati 320 km exclusive economic zone and is roughly

340 km from the nearest inhabited island. The licensing process will

evaluate these factors.

Threatened and Endangered Species

There are no known threatened and endangered species that will be

impacted by the proposed launch activities.

Archeological and Cultural Resources

The launch activities, proposed to occur in the open ocean, will

not impact archeological or cultural resources.

Cumulative Impacts

There are no other foreseeable planned developments in the area of

the proposed launch location at this time; therefore, no cumulative

impacts are expected. The Navy Mole facility is currently underutilized

as compared to its historical level of operation and development. The

Home Port facility may be the impetus for other development in the

area.

[[Page 20243]]

Other Environmental Considerations

Home Port

The design, permitting, construction, and operation of the Home

port would be managed under the jurisdiction of the state, regional,

county, municipal, and port authorities of the Port of Long Beach,

California. The Navy, as part of the California Environmental Quality

Act Process, submitted the Mole EA to the California Coastal Commission

for review, which determined the proposed Home Port activities were not

inconsistent with the California Coastal Zone Management Program. The

Port of Long Beach has approved the construction and operation of the

Home Port through the Harbor Development Permit process. One of the

standard conditions in the Harbor Development Permit is that SLLP will

follow all applicable Federal, state, and local laws and regulations,

including those pertaining to safety and the environment.

No Action Alternative

Under the No Action alternative the SLLP would not launch

satellites from the Pacific Ocean and the Port of Long Beach would

remain available for other commercial or government ventures. The goals

of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle IX, ch. 701 Commercial Space Launch Activities,

would not be realized. Predicted environmental impacts of the proposed

launch activities would not occur and the project area would remain in

its current state.

Determination

An analysis of the proposed action has concluded that there are no

significant short-term or long-term effects to the environment or

surrounding populations. After careful and thorough consideration of

the facts contained herein, the undersigned finds that the proposed

Federal action is consistent with existing national environmental

policies and objectives as set forth in section 101(a) of the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and that it will not

significantly affect the quality of the human environment or otherwise

include any condition requiring consultation pursuant to section

102(2)(C) of NEPA. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement for the

proposed action would not be required.

Issued in Washington, DC on April 17, 1998.

Manuel F. Vega,

Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for Commercial Space

Transportation.

[FR Doc. 98-10748 Filed 4-22-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P