FAA, SpaceX Spar Over Fines, Starship IFT-5 Delay

FAA, SpaceX Spar Over Fines, Starship IFT-5 Delay

By Marcia Smith | Posted: September 25, 2024 6:24 pm ET | Last Updated: September 25, 2024 6:30 pm ET

FAA Administrator Michael Whitaker and SpaceX founder and chief engineer Elon Musk are at odds over fines the FAA wants to impose because SpaceX allegedly did not adhere to regulatory requirements and a two-month delay in approving the fifth test flight of the company’s new Starship rocket.  Whitaker explained the FAA’s position at a congressional hearing yesterday and SpaceX quickly asserted that “every statement he made was incorrect.”

The hearing before a House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee was about FAA’s regulatory oversight of Boeing’s commercial aircraft division, but Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-CA) turned the topic to SpaceX about mid-way through. He made the segue by saying there are questions about Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft, too, and now two astronauts will have to return on a SpaceX vehicle instead.

Kiley then asked Whitaker about the “undue scrutiny” the FAA has been giving to SpaceX “with a $633,000 fine for launches last year” and “delaying the fifth mission for Starship for two months” and whether that delay “is in the public interest.”

Whitaker replied that “safety is in the public interest” and SpaceX failed to provide an updated sonic boom analysis, which caused 30 days of the delay, and another delay was because SpaceX didn’t comply with Texas environmental regulations. Whitaker agreed that Starship is “a vital mission,” and the way for SpaceX to move up the launch date is to comply with regulations.

SpaceX sent a letter to Kiley after the hearing asserting that Whitaker’s statements were incorrect.

The licensing delay for Starship and the fine are separate issues, but both are under the jurisdiction of the FAA and its Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST).

Starship is SpaceX’s new giant rocket under development at the company’s Starbase facility in Boca Chica, TX.  Four Integrated Test Flights (IFTs) have taken place so far and SpaceX is ready for the fifth, IFT-5, but waiting for a launch license from the FAA.

SpaceX’s Starship/Super Heavy rocket on the launch pad in Boca Chica, TX just before its first launch in April 2023. The Super Heavy first stage booster is silver. The second stage, Starship, is covered in black thermal protection tiles. The combination of the two is also referred to as Starship. Credit: SpaceX

On September 11, SpaceX posted a complaint on its website that the FAA was delaying the IFT-5 license decision by two months, from September to November, not because of safety, but environmental concerns. Ensuring public safety during commercial space launches is the primary role for the FAA/AST, but it also leads an interagency process to ensure compliance with other federal regulations, including environmental regulations set by the EPA, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and others.

Commercial space launch companies also must meet state and local requirements. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality recently fined SpaceX for discharging industrial wastewater from the Starship/Super Heavy flame pit. SpaceX denies the charges, but says it agreed to pay the fine in order to move forward with launches.

In response, the FAA issued a statement that the license it issued for IFT-4 was good for multiple launches, but SpaceX modified the vehicle configuration and mission profile for IFT-5, requiring additional review. Also, in mid-August the company submitted information that the environmental impact of IFT-5 would cover a larger area than previously reviewed and thus the FAA needs more time.

One major change between IFT-4 and IFT-5 is that SpaceX plans not only to launch Starship/Super Heavy from Boca Chica, TX, but to return the Super Heavy booster to the launch site, catching it just before it reaches the ground. SpaceX’s rockets are designed to be reusable.

The question of whether delaying the IFT-5 launch is in the public interest refers at least in part to the fact that NASA contracted with SpaceX to use Starship as the Human Landing System (HLS) for the Artemis program to return astronauts to the Moon. Any delays could impact the September 2026 schedule for Artemis III, the first time NASA plans to land astronauts on the Moon since the Apollo program.  During a House Science, Space, and Technology subcommittee hearing the same day SpaceX posted its complaint, subcommittee chair Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX) said:  “I fear that at this rate, the Communist Party will launch taikonauts to the Moon while U.S. industry remains tethered to Earth with red tape.”

As for the fines, on September 17, the FAA announced it is proposing a $633,009 civil penalty against SpaceX “for allegedly failing to follow its license requirements during two launches in 2023.”

“In May 2023, SpaceX submitted a request to revise its communications plan related to its license to launch from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida. The proposed revisions included adding a new launch control room at Hangar X and removing the T-2 hour readiness poll from its procedures. On June 18, 2023, SpaceX used the unapproved launch control room for the PSN SATRIA mission and did not conduct the required T-2 hour poll. The FAA is proposing $350,000 in civil penalties ($175,000 for each alleged violation).

“In July 2023, SpaceX submitted a request to revise its explosive site plan related to its license to launch from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The proposed revision reflected a newly constructed rocket propellant farm. On July 28, 2023, SpaceX used the unapproved rocket propellant farm for the EchoStar XXIV/Jupiter mission. The FAA is proposing a $283,009 civil penalty.” — FAA

SpaceX has 30 days to respond to the FAA’s allegations.

At the hearing, Whitaker said the penalties were for not complying with launch requirements: SpaceX launched “without a permit” and “moved a fuel farm closer to the population and did not do a risk analysis before launching.”

In its letter to Kylie after the hearing that SpaceX posted on Musk’s social media site X, the company disputed Whitaker’s statements and said it is “deeply concerning that the Administrator does not appear to have accurate information immediately available to him with respect to SpaceX.”

Kylie’s closing question to Whitaker was whether he agrees that the “FAA needs to be reformed in a way that is better suited toward the type of innovation that we should be moving toward in the commercial space industry?”

Whitaker agreed SpaceX has been “a very innovative company, but I think they’re also a mature company. They’ve been around 20 years and I think they need to operate at the highest level of safety. That includes adopting an SMS [Safety Management System] program and it includes having a whistleblower.” If they want to move up the IFT-5 launch, “complying with the regulations would be the best” path.

A first term Congressman, Kylie represents California’s 3rd district, which stretches from the northeastern suburbs of Sacramento to Lake Tahoe to Death Valley. He praised the Polaris Dawn mission and other SpaceX achievements and teed up his criticism of the FAA during a September 20 speech on the House floor.

Last Updated: Sep 25, 2024 6:30 pm ET

User Comments



SpacePolicyOnline.com has the right (but not the obligation) to monitor the comments and to remove any materials it deems inappropriate.  We do not post comments that include links to other websites since we have no control over that content nor can we verify the security of such links.

SPACEPOLICYONLINE.COM

About | Contact | Privacy