# Presentation: 749783

## Or

- How Fast Can You Do an
- Environmental Impact Statement?

## SO YOU WANT TO BUILD A SPACEPORT?

**SO YOU WANT TO BUILD A SPACEPORT?**
- Well, what are the environmental challenges ahead of you?
- We have much to learn from the X-33 experience:

- What are the issues associated with constructing and operating spaceports?
- Who wants to have input to your decisions?
- How long does it take to identify and resolve the issues?
- Are there any surprises in store?

## X-33 was designed to be sub-orbital

- Testing technologies for VentureStar
- This presented unique issues regarding landing sites and recovery operations
- It also required construction of facilities at multiple sites
- And transportation between sites

## We did it in 13 months

- An EIS normally takes from 18 to 24 months to complete
-  Scoping
-  Field Studies
-  Analyses
- Document Preparation
- Public Review
- We were given 12 months

## Edwards Air Force Base had already been selected as the launch site

- This had been selected using a previous environmental study for the program
- There were three flight expansion envelopes
-  But multiple landing sites for each envelope
- These became the alternatives addressed in the EIS

**SHORT**

**MEDIUM**

**LONG**

## So once you have the site, the rest should be relatively easy.

- That is, the main issues that could cause you to spend time and resources should be obvious, right?

## Enter the Desert Tortoise:

- This is an Endangered Species native to this region
- There are strict controls protecting them
- Harassment is prohibited
- Picking one up to move it off the road to “save” it is considered harassment because if you scare it, it may “lose all its water” and dehydrate and die
- Therefore, strict controls during construction such as stopping all traffic when a tortoise was crossing the road.

## Short range landing sites included numerous “dry”lake beds in the EAFB region

- Many of these were on federal (Bureau of Land Management) lands
- These areas are open for public use
- So, what’s the Problem?

**Silurian Dry Lake Bed**

- While private vehicles can drive on the lake without permission, NASA was required to get permits to use it
- The specific types of activities and areas of impact needed to be approved by BLM
- And, State Highway 127 is the only road with miles of the site, a traffic control plan was required

## So assuming you’ve got all the site construction issues addressed,

- What about operations?
- Well, again, you have to be aware of and protect our friends, the Desert Tortoises.

- Of course, flight safety and the probability if catastrophic failure was a major concern and the corresponding risk assessments took much of the analysis efforts.
- However, some of the more interesting issues arose from the noise impacts analyses....

## We looked at noise impacts for static test firing and lift-off at the launch site

- We also looked at noise impacts related to flight conditions to both on-base and off-site communities

## The flight path generates two types of sonic booms:

- The focused boom results from the acceleration of the vehicle
- It is more powerful that the sonic boom from normal or decelerating flight
- The position and intensity of the effect is dependent on the trajectory, vehicle configuration and atmospheric conditions

- Focused

- Normal

## Of interest to us were the recipients of these noise impacts

- We addressed this, in part, by looking at the land use categories that lay underneath the projected flight paths for each alternative

## The launch noise and focus boom did not affect much but BLM lands

- However, for the mid-range site, the landing sonic booms had the potential to impact several Indian Reservations, much of which is considered Sacred Lands by the residents!

## However, the peak sonic boom overpressures from normal flight operations to the proposed long-range landing site could effect eight mountain passes and five ski areas.

- So we had to address the potential for these flights to produce snow avalanches!

- The Long-range site also had few issues associated with launch impacts

## We asked how the vehicle would be returned to the launch site

- We were told that the ONLY possible way to bring it back was atop the NASA 747 Carrier Aircraft

## After completion of the EIS, during implementation planning, it was determined that this approach was not workable

- It was decided to put the vehicle on a carrier and bring it back to the launch site over the public roads

- There was then a follow-on study done to determine the most feasible route to use

## Summary

- The environmental process is your friend, it can help resolve potential problems before they become bigger, **so use it.**
- Allow sufficient time and resources to perform the needed analyses.
- Start early.
- Each project is unique, so don’t be surprised at what you find.
- We are here to help, if you want it!
- Mario Busacca
- 321-867-8456
- mario.busacca-1@ksc.nasa.gov