FAA, FWS & other permits/licenses for Starbase, TX (Boca Chica) DISCUSSION (Thread 6)

[thespacecow]

Both sides are standing down, I'm going to bet 6/5 is a nothing burger.

Meh.  Musk lost favoritism

I never counted on favoritism, neither did Musk.

If you read my original comment, it's about general NEPA reform, it's not SpaceX specific.

BTW, there has been new NEPA reform progress being made since my last post, ironically as part of OBBBA... Just another evidence that Musk is not in it for himself.

[envy887]

Both sides are standing down, I'm going to bet 6/5 is a nothing burger.

Meh.  Musk lost favoritism

I never counted on favoritism, neither did Musk.

If you read my original comment, it's about general NEPA reform, it's not SpaceX specific.

BTW, there has been new NEPA reform progress being made since my last post, ironically as part of OBBBA... Just another evidence that Musk is not in it for himself.

It's not favoritism (which involves unfairly helping one entity at the expense of another), but SpaceX was probably hoping for pressure from the administration at higher levels on FAA and associated agencies to actually do their job as legally required, specifically that "the Secretary shall encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial space launches and reentries by the private sector" 51 USC 50903 b(1).

And also "the Secretary shall ... take actions to facilitate private sector involvement in commercial space transportation activity, and to promote public-private partnerships involving the United States Government, State governments, and the private sector to build, expand, modernize, or operate a space launch and reentry infrastructure." 51 USC 50903 b(2).

And "the United States should encourage private sector launches, reentries, and associated services and, only to the extent necessary, regulate those launches, reentries, and services to ensure compliance with international obligations of the United States and to protect the public health and safety, safety of property, and national security and foreign policy interests of the United States" 51 USC 50901 a(7).

The natural pace of bureaucracy is incompatible with effectively fulfilling these statutory requirements at the pace that SpaceX wants to operate, and having some top-down incentive to actually do what the law demands would likely help SpaceX move at something closer to their desired pace.

That's probably not going to happen now... unless SpaceX gets the courts involved.

[thespacecow]

It's not favoritism (which involves unfairly helping one entity at the expense of another), but SpaceX was probably hoping for pressure from the administration at higher levels on FAA and associated agencies to actually do their job as legally required, specifically that "the Secretary shall encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial space launches and reentries by the private sector" 51 USC 50903 b(1).

I'm not sure that's the case, I don't think Elon was expecting calls from WH to FAA to unblock things.

I think the SpaceX/FAA cooperation has been smooth in the past 6 months, and I'm not aware any report of WH pressure being applied. I believe most if not all SpaceX goals can be met with: a. general de-regulation; b. an administration that is not hostile to them.

[meekGee]

It's not favoritism (which involves unfairly helping one entity at the expense of another), but SpaceX was probably hoping for pressure from the administration at higher levels on FAA and associated agencies to actually do their job as legally required, specifically that "the Secretary shall encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial space launches and reentries by the private sector" 51 USC 50903 b(1).

I'm not sure that's the case, I don't think Elon was expecting calls from WH to FAA to unblock things.

I think the SpaceX/FAA cooperation has been smooth in the past 6 months, and I'm not aware any report of WH pressure being applied. I believe most if not all SpaceX goals can be met with: a. general de-regulation; b. an administration that is not hostile to them.

I'm 100% with you on this when it comes to streamlining operations.  It's been happening, and any previous dislikes didn't interfere. Of anyone, maybe Musk inserted personality when things didn't happen as quickly as he wanted.

HOWEVER, when it (will) come to non-standard decisions regarding things like Mars settlement, it cannot not be political and personal.  Because every decision will be controversial no matter what happens.

And it's not favouritism, it's an entire stance about bold moves like that.

We'll see how this plays out.

[Robotbeat]

Note that the FAA under the Biden/Harris Administration in 2023 made Mars settlement effectively illegal by requiring launch permit applications to show how they plan to meet COSPAR requirements, which categorize the entire subsurface as a “special region.” Technically, the FAA /can/ choose to allow some other method of approval, but this one act effectively forced Elon to get into politics.

Specifically, this act reinforced a *particular* interpretation of the Outer Space Treaty (grandfathered in compounded conservatism, ending up defining “harmful contamination” as effectively sending anything in sterilized, which is NOT an obvious and universal understanding of that section, which to most people reads as like not spreading radioactive waste or something) which effectively makes space settlement impossible as you can’t sterilize humans and you can’t feasibly prove sterilization every time you put a shovel into the soil.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_450.31-1.pdf

It also effectively makes COSPAR no longer a toothless advisory committee but instead an authority, unelected by the American people, on what can be done in space at all. And the leadership of COSPAR doesn’t want Mars settlement, thinks it should only have scientific bases. (Slide is from the current President of COSPAR.)

It’s easy to see why Elon felt like he had to enter politics. Space law had evolved, purely by regulatory decisions (under authority of the Executive Branch) and not by actual democratically elected law, to effectively make the end goal of SpaceX impossible.

Either through getting this FAA decision changed or interpreted much more favorably, getting judges appointed that don’t look kindly on regulatory overreach, or getting the US to withdraw from the treaty entirely… Elon basically had no choice left if he actually wanted to settle Mars.

[meekGee]

Note that the FAA under the Biden/Harris Administration in 2023 made Mars settlement effectively illegal by requiring launch permit applications to show how they plan to meet COSPAR requirements, which categorize the entire subsurface as a “special region.” Technically, the FAA /can/ choose to allow some other method of approval, but this one act effectively forced Elon to get into politics.
...

I didn't know that, and it's exactly what I was worried would happen.

What a stupid stupid uniformed move.

[Apollo22]

Note that the FAA under the Biden/Harris Administration in 2023 made Mars settlement effectively illegal by requiring launch permit applications to show how they plan to meet COSPAR requirements, which categorize the entire subsurface as a “special region.” Technically, the FAA /can/ choose to allow some other method of approval, but this one act effectively forced Elon to get into politics.

Specifically, this act reinforced a *particular* interpretation of the Outer Space Treaty (grandfathered in compounded conservatism, ending up defining “harmful contamination” as effectively sending anything in sterilized, which is NOT an obvious and universal understanding of that section, which to most people reads as like not spreading radioactive waste or something) which effectively makes space settlement impossible as you can’t sterilize humans and you can’t feasibly prove sterilization every time you put a shovel into the soil.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_450.31-1.pdf

It also effectively makes COSPAR no longer a toothless advisory committee but instead an authority, unelected by the American people, on what can be done in space at all. And the leadership of COSPAR doesn’t want Mars settlement, thinks it should only have scientific bases. (Slide is from the current President of COSPAR.)

It’s easy to see why Elon felt like he had to enter politics. Space law had evolved, purely by regulatory decisions (under authority of the Executive Branch) and not by actual democratically elected law, to effectively make the end goal of SpaceX impossible.

Either through getting this FAA decision changed or interpreted much more favorably, getting judges appointed that don’t look kindly on regulatory overreach, or getting the US to withdraw from the treaty entirely… Elon basically had no choice left if he actually wanted to settle Mars.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=61466.msg2690649#msg2690649   

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=62942.msg2691315#msg2691315

Moderator:
No need to stray into the space politics of (potential) planetary protection, COSPAR, etc. in this thread, outside of the Space Policy sub-forum.

Moderator:
Planetary protection: Don't we have other threads for that discussion?

So Robotbeat, you really can't help yourself about planetary protection... and that's a little tiring. It derails threads, or it gets  them locked, or trimmed.

Just' saying !

[meekGee]

So Robotbeat, you really can't help yourself about planetary protection... and that's a little tiring. It derails threads, or it gets  them locked, or trimmed.

Just' saying !

That wasn't about potential or speculative anything, but about concrete legislation guiding the FAA, right on topic.

It's impossible to discuss a government agency's policies without touching politics.

Best we can do is avoid spilling into irrelevant political topics.

[Robotbeat]

FAA circulars, not legislation.

I do believe it is relevant. To get a license from the FAA, the FAA in that circular is requiring companies to show how they meet COSPAR requirements. Not a hypothetical, as of 2023.


And actually I didn’t see the notice at the top of the thread. I wasn’t intentionally flaunting it. And I agree with trying to avoid getting in to the politics in this section.

[KilroySmith]

I am not well-versed in this area, but it seems to me that SpaceX landing on Mars shouldn't be an issue.

The provided slide from COSPAR appears to specifically allow human flights to Mars.  The "Antarctica model" certainly includes scientific bases, containing human beings.  For the first several available launch windows, that is all that is going to be set up, regardless of Musk's long term intentions.  Once there are bases successfully operating on Mars, the question of "settlement" is open - if you think the President of the USA at that time is going to be handcuffed by a third-party anointed by an agency regulation put in place during a previous administration, especially following the Trump administration's wrecking ball, you're a bit naive. 

[Robotbeat]

Sorry, I should point to the planetary protection threads here

[mlindner]

Beachfront construction certificate and dune protection permit for building an air separation unit across the road from the launch site right next to the beach on top of the dunes. https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/w1ctsf3wvvdrwt3ne7xgt/ALXpNv1wIMh_NGN7Yssp67s/2025.06.17%20-%20Agenda%20-%20Regular%20Meeting/04.%20Action?e=2&preview=4____S.pdf&rlkey=pzzbtru91ehdiui1dg2jfdbrs&subfolder_nav_tracking=1&dl=0

[catdlr]

Beachfront construction certificate and dune protection permit for building an air separation unit across the road from the launch site right next to the beach on top of the dunes. https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/w1ctsf3wvvdrwt3ne7xgt/ALXpNv1wIMh_NGN7Yssp67s/2025.06.17%20-%20Agenda%20-%20Regular%20Meeting/04.%20Action?e=2&preview=4____S.pdf&rlkey=pzzbtru91ehdiui1dg2jfdbrs&subfolder_nav_tracking=1&dl=0

The location of the Air Separation plan is adjacent to the new roundabout and opposite the launch site.  I have posted selected images from the document.  If Pad A (1) is reconstructed to a flame trench similar to Pad B (2), the orientation of the southmost flame duct would be just off the direct line with this proposed building site, but I question the impact of the sonic waves emanating from the launch directed towards that area.

[StraumliBlight]

1114-EX-ST-2025 [Jun 16]

This STA application seeks authority to engage in communications necessary for upcoming launches.

Operation of satellite user terminals on an experimental basis during upcoming launches.

Operation Start Date: 08/14/2025
Operation End Date: 02/14/2026

SpaceX seeks authority to mount and operate Starlink earth stations on the SpaceX Super Heavy booster, Starship spacecraft, and within the payload section of the second stage of Falcon 9 launch vehicles for upcoming flights between July, 2025 and January, 2026. These flights will originate at Starbase, TX, Vandenberg SFB, and Cape Canaveral SFS and are expected to reach peak altitudes of up to 600 km. SpaceX’s satellite constellation can provide unprecedented volumes of telemetry and enable communications during atmospheric entry when ionized plasma around the spacecraft inhibits conventional telemetry frequencies.

For Starship launches as Starbase, TX, Starlink terminals will be fitted to each vehicle to ensure a clear view of the SpaceX satellite constellation through the vehicle flight profile. For Falcon launches from Cape Canaveral SFS and Vandenberg SFB, a Starlink terminal will be installed within the payload fairing and will begin operating only well into the mission, after the fairing opens. In both cases, SpaceX vehicles leverage previously authorized consumer terminals with environmental modifications suitable for the mission profile.

Each earth station will communicate only with those SpaceX satellites that are visible on the horizon above a minimum elevation angle and that observe the appropriate angular separation from the Geostationary Orbital (“GSO”) arc. The phased array earth station will track SpaceX’s NGSO satellites passing within their field of view. As the terminal steers the transmitting beam, it automatically changes the power to maintain a constant level at the receiving antenna of its target satellite to the extent possible, compensating for variations in antenna gain and path loss associated with the steering angle.

1124-EX-ST-2025 [Jun 17]

Launch vehicle communications for Test Flight 11 mission launching from Starbase, TX. The first stage booster and the second stage will either return to the launch site or perform a water landing.

Operation Start Date: 07/16/2025
Operation End Date: 01/16/2026

1126-EX-ST-2025 [Jun 17]

This STA uses information from previous grant 0910-EX-ST-2025 and is necessary to authorize an additional power level for uplink frequencies 2056 MHz and 2062 MHz for the booster and ship on Starship Test Flight 11 launching from Starbase TX.

Operation Start Date: 07/16/2025
Operation End Date: 01/16/2026

Location: Boca Chica, TX (25-59-27.0 N 97-10-55.0 W)
MIRAD: 806 KM (500.93 miles) East trajectory over water
Maximum flight altitude: 0-380160', AGL, (0-72 miles AGL)
Dates: 2025-06-28 thru 2025-12-28