Commercial Space 

Transportation

Final Environmental Assessment

for the Blue Origin West Texas

Commercial Launch Site

Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration

Commercial Space Transportation

August, 2006

HQ-030906.INDD

 

This page intentionally left blank.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ES-1 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Blue Origin, LLC (Blue Origin) is a commercial venture that proposes to construct and operate a 

privately-owned space launch site in Culberson County, Texas. In accordance with the 

Commercial Space Launch Act, the Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial 

Space Transportation (AST) is responsible for regulating certain aspects of the construction and 

operation of the proposed launch facility by, among other things, issuing required permits or 

licenses. This environmental assessment has been prepared to comply with the National 

Environmental Policy Act regarding AST’s decision on issuing such permits and licenses. 

Proposed Action 

The proposed action is for AST to issue one or more experimental permits and/or licenses to 

Blue Origin. Blue Origin proposes to launch reusable launch vehicles (RLVs) on suborbital, 

ballistic trajectories to altitudes in excess of 99,060 meters (325,000 feet). To conduct these 

operations, Blue Origin would construct a private launch site, which would include a vehicle 

processing facility, launch complex, vehicle landing and recovery area, space flight participant 

training facility, and other minor support facilities. 

Candidate launch sites included two privately-owned parcels in Culberson County, Texas, the 

proposed state-sponsored Southwest Regional Spaceport in Upham, New Mexico, and the Pecos 

County Aerospace Development Corporation-sponsored Pecos County West Texas Spaceport at 

Fort Stockton, Texas. 

Blue Origin subsequently elected to conduct a more detailed analysis of the Culberson County 

sites. Blue Origin determined that launching from a remote, privately-owned, launch site would 

offer significant cost, schedule, and operational benefits for its proposed activities. 

For these reasons, Blue Origin determined that the Culberson County alternatives would best 

permit the company to conduct innovative, flexible RLV operations consistent with its program, 

schedule and cost requirements. 

Affected Environment 

Overview

The proposed Blue Origin launch site is approximately 40.2 kilometers (25 miles) north of Van 

Horn, Texas. It lies within a larger, privately-owned property known as the Corn Ranch. 

Air Resources 

The proposed launch site is located in an air quality control region that has always been in 

attainment with Federal and state ambient air quality standards, and therefore analysis of 

conformity to the Clean Air Act is not required. The air quality in Culberson County can be 

generally considered as unimpaired. There are no air monitoring stations in Culberson County, 

therefore, the county is deemed unclassifiable/attainment for all National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS). (40 CFR 81.344) 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ES-2 

Ecological Resources

The Corn Ranch is within the Chihuahuan Desert, where the dominant vegetation community is 

known as Chihuahuan Desert Scrub. Wildlife in the area consists of typical Chihuahuan Desert 

species, and includes a variety of birds, small mammals, and reptiles found throughout the TransPecos region of Texas. 

Cultural/Native American Resources 

A cultural resources inventory was conducted to identify prehistoric and historic resources. A 

total of 36 prehistoric and historic resources were identified: seven sites and 29 isolated 

occurrences. Two of the seven sites are eligible for application for inclusion in the National 

Register of Historic Places. Plans have been developed to protect these cultural resources during 

the construction phase of the project. 

Hazardous Materials/Waste Management 

Current activities at the proposed launch site require very limited use of hazardous materials 

(fuel for portable generator) or waste management. There is currently no hazardous waste or 

wastewater generation at the site. 

Land Use (including Farmland and Section 4(f) Resources) 

Most of the land within a 40.2-kilometer (25-mile) radius of the proposed launch facility is 

privately-owned. This land includes working farms and cattle ranches and former ranch 

properties that are now leased to groups of hunters and managed for game species, primarily 

mule deer. 

No state or county parks or recreation areas lie within 80 kilometers (50 miles) of the proposed 

launch site. Guadalupe Mountains National Park (Texas) and Carlsbad Caverns National Park 

(New Mexico) are 35 and 60 kilometers (22 and 37 miles), respectively, north of the proposed 

launch site. Guadalupe Mountains National Park is a 348-square kilometer (86,000-acre) park 

that receives approximately 180,000 visitors annually. Carlsbad Caverns National Park, a 

190-square kilometer (47,000-acre) park, receives more than 400,000 visitors annually. 

Visual Resources 

The Corn Ranch property encompasses a broad valley at elevation 1,097-1,189 meters (3,600-

3,900 feet) above mean sea level with a northwest-southeast orientation. The valley, which is 

approximately 16 kilometers (10 miles) wide, consists of desert scrubland and arid grassland. 

The existing conditions at the Corn Ranch would be rated as moderate to high visual sensitivity. 

Current light sources include a dozen homes in the valley, vehicle headlights on State 

Highway 54 and warning lights on the Delaware Mountain Wind Farm. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ES-3 

Noise 

The baseline noise levels in the region of the proposed launch site are those typical of a remote 

desert – approximately 22 to 38 dBA. (FAA 2001) There is occasional road noise on State 

Highway 54 and aircraft noise, from commercial jetliners and low-level military aircraft. Lowlevel military aircraft flights can produce maximum noise levels ranging from 88 to 115 dBA at 

152 meters (500 feet) altitude. (United States Air Force [USAF] 1998) 

Geology and Soils (including Floodplains) 

The proposed launch site is located in West Texas within the Trans-Pecos region of the Basin 

and Range Physiographic Province in West Texas. Seismic activity in this area is mostly 

associated with the Rio Grande Rift region west of the site. However, the facilities would be 

sited, designed, and built to prevent damage from a possible earthquake. 

Although average annual rainfall is low (28 centimeters [11 inches] per year) (Larkin and Bomar 

1983) at the launch site, and it would not be located in the 100-year floodplain (Federal 

Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map), localized flooding is possible. 

The potential for flooding in the proposed facility areas is low. 

Soils at the proposed site fall into two broad classifications. Generally the Reakor-Verhalen 

association is found in the eastern portion of the site and the Holloman-Reeves association is 

found in the western portion. These soil associations are well to moderately well drained. 

Topographic relief at the proposed launch site is generally moderate with an average slope of 

about 9.5 meters per kilometer (50 feet per mile). There is a fairly prominent ridge located in the 

southwestern portion of the site that separates the proposed facility locations from State Highway 

54. Surface water generally flows from east to west in the area of the proposed launch site. On 

the infrequent occasions that it rains, water in the vicinity of the launch site would tend to flow to 

the west into the salt basin(s) between the site and State Highway 54. Runoff water from the 

Sierra Diablo Mountains would flow eastward into the same basin(s) and would not affect the 

launch site. 

Socioeconomics (including Natural Resources and Energy Supply) 

The government sector employs the greatest number of workers in the region; other important 

sectors of employment include farming, retail trade, and services. (BEA 2005) The labor force 

in the region decreased at the same time that the labor force increased in the state of Texas. The 

average per capita income in the two-county area was $16,040, compared to the state of Texas 

average of $29,074. (BEA 2005) 

Between 1990 and 2004, the region’s population decreased, while for the same period, the 

population in the state of Texas increased. Culberson and Hudspeth counties are both among the 

25 least densely populated counties in the continental U.S. 

There are three school districts in the region serving 890 students. The region is served by the 

Culberson County Hospital District in Van Horn. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ES-4 

The existing energy demands at the proposed site are met by the intermittent use of a diesel 

power generator. The current activities at the site do not require the use of water supplies. 

Traffic and Transportation 

The proposed launch site is approximately 40 air kilometers (25 air miles) and 48 road 

kilometers (30 road miles) north of Van Horn. Access to the proposed launch site is from Texas 

Highway 54, which is approximately eight kilometers (five miles) west of the proposed project’s 

center of operations. 

Union Pacific operates a major rail line from El Paso to Dallas, approximately 40 kilometers (25 

miles) to the south of the proposed site, running approximately parallel to I-10 and passing 

through Van Horn. The nearest major air service is at El Paso International Airport, which 

serves several national and international passenger airlines and cargo carriers. There is a small 

county airport in Van Horn. 

Traffic on Highway 54 is extremely light. Although a Level-of-Service analysis has not been 

performed, traffic on Highway 54 can be characterized as free flow or Class A as defined by the 

National Research Council. (NRC 1985) There is no traffic accident data for this highway, but 

given the infrequent traffic, the rate would be very small. 

Water Resources (including Wetlands and Wild and Scenic Rivers) 

There are no permanent, naturally occurring surface waters or open freshwater systems, or 

federally protected wetlands, as defined by section 404 of the Clean Water Act, on the proposed 

site. The proposed Blue Origin site is located near the boundary of the Salt Basin Bolson and 

Capitan Reef aquifers where the former overlays the latter. TWDB well records indicate that all 

of the existing water producing wells within the proposed site produce water from the Salt 

Bolson formation. 

The only wild and scenic river in Texas is a 307-kilometer (191-mile) stretch of the United States 

side of the Rio Grande River along the Mexican border beginning in Big Bend National Park. 

This wild and scenic river is not in the ROI for this project; therefore, impacts to the river are not 

considered in this EA.

Water from eight existing wells on and in the immediate vicinity of the proposed Blue Origin site 

was analyzed to characterize site specific ground water quantity and quality. Total dissolved 

solids concentrations indicated water that was slightly saline at five of the wells, moderately 

saline at two of the wells, and very saline at one well. 

Airspace 

Air traffic within a 7.4-kilometer (4-nautical mile) radius of the test pad has been examined using 

data provided by FAA Air Traffic Control. During the period December 12, 2005 through 

December 16, 2005, aircraft tracks through this airspace ranged from 102 to 129 per day. The 

majority of these aircraft, 92 to 122 per day, were non-military. The Department of Defense 

currently notes two low-level training routes that pass within a 7.4-kilometer (4-nautical mile) 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ES-5 

distance of the proposed launch site, 1R 102 and 1R 194. Commercial air-route V-198 also 

passes within a 7.4-kilometer (4-nautical mile) radius of the proposed launch site. 

Environmental Justice

For Culberson County, the aggregate of minority races is 31.1 percent. Persons of Hispanic or 

Latino origin (ethnicity) accounted for 72.2 percent of the total County population. White 

persons accounted for 68.9 percent of the total County population. None of the 2000 minority 

populations for the two census tracts are meaningfully greater than the corresponding minority 

population in Culberson County. 

Environmental Consequences 

Air Resources 

Impacts on air quality would occur during the construction and operation of the launch site. The 

estimated increases in emission concentrations from planned construction activities would be 

small fractions of either state or Federal ambient air quality standards. Construction impacts are 

expected to be localized and short-term. The estimated increases in ambient background 

concentrations from operations would be negligible. No significant impacts on air resources 

would be anticipated. 

Ecological Resources 

Construction activities would result in the clearing, grading, or disturbance of approximately 308 

hectares (760 acres), which is approximately 4.1 percent of the 7,527 hectares (18,600 acres) 

contained within the launch site perimeter fence line. Almost all construction activity would be 

in vegetation characterized as creosote bush community, which comprises approximately 5,595 

hectares (13,825 acres) of the launch site. Because this plant community type is common on the 

launch site and throughout the Chihuahuan Desert, the anticipated loss would represent only a 

small portion of this habitat type and would not adversely affect local or regional diversity of 

plants and plant communities. 

Construction activities would cause impacts on wildlife through elimination of vegetation 

communities (i.e., habitats) and their associated fauna. Small numbers of less-mobile, burrowdwelling animals (e.g., pocket gophers, chipmunks) inhabiting the construction area could be 

displaced by construction activity or killed if burrows are filled, crushed, or paved. More mobile 

animals such as birds and larger mammal species (e.g., jackrabbits, pronghorn) would be 

expected to disperse to less-disturbed areas of the proposed launch site or off site. 

Launch noise and sonic booms would have potential for disturbing wildlife. Launch noise could 

disrupt movement and feeding of wildlife, especially birds and mammals, for approximately one 

minute after lift-off within a 12.9-kilometer (8-mile) radius of the launch site. Sonic booms 

could have the same effect on wildlife during landings. In both cases, the disturbance would be 

short lived and would have no more effect on local wildlife than military aircraft that routinely 

fly over the Corn Ranch property on low-level training missions. Birds and mammals typically 

return to normal activities a relatively short time after being exposed to aircraft and launch noise. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ES-6 

No state or federally listed species was observed in surveys of the proposed Blue Origin site 

conducted in January and April 2005. Based on the habitats present, three state-listed species 

(Chihuahuan Desert lyre snake, Trans-Pecos black-headed snake, Texas horned lizard) and one 

federally-listed species (Northern aplomado falcon) could occur in limited numbers in the 

vicinity of the site. It is conceivable that small numbers of these state listed reptiles or Northern 

aplomado falcons could be disturbed by construction activities, launch noise or sonic booms. 

Any disturbance from launch activities would be brief (less than approximately one minute) and 

create impacts similar to those currently experienced as a result of military aircraft overflying the 

proposed launch site. Depending on the species and its sensitivity to noise, there would likely be 

some level of startle response, with normal activity ceasing for a minute or so, then resuming 

when the launch noise or sonic boom noise diminished. The proposed launch site does not 

contain suitable habitat for six of the 12 state-listed species (common black hawk, gray hawk, 

zone-tailed hawk, Pecos pupfish, Chihuahuan mud turtle, and mountain short-horned lizard), so 

construction of the proposed launch site would have no effect on these species. The black bear, 

state-listed as threatened, is occasionally found in desert lowlands in west Texas, but prefers 

mountainous forest, and bears have not been observed by Blue Origin personnel or contractors in 

the vicinity of the proposed launch site. The American peregrine falcon (state-endangered) and 

Arctic peregrine falcon (state-threatened) might pass through the vicinity of the proposed launch 

site during migration, but would not nest there. Thus, construction of the proposed launch site 

would have no impact on the black bear, the American peregrine falcon, or the Arctic peregrine 

falcon. 

The remaining three state-listed special status species that could potentially occur in vicinity of 

the proposed launch site are the Chihuahuan Desert lyre snake, the Texas horned lizard, and the 

Trans-Pecos black-headed snake. Potential habitat for the Chihuahuan Desert lyre snake within 

the proposed launch site is very limited, and occurs along the limestone ridge bisecting the 

western portion of the site. No construction is planned for this area, and thus, the proposed 

action would have no effect on this species. The Texas horned lizard is found in a variety of 

habitats and could occur within the proposed launch site. Potential habitat for the Trans-Pecos 

black-headed snake at the proposed launch site consists of mesquite-creosote scrub. Although 

neither the Texas horned lizard nor the Trans-Pecos black-headed snake was observed during 

biological surveys, their existence at the proposed launch site cannot be ruled out. Nevertheless, 

construction activities would impact only a relatively small portion of either species’ habitat in 

Culberson County or the Trans-Pecos region, and population impacts on these two species would 

not be expected. 

The FAA contacted the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding potential impacts to 

threatened or endangered species. The USFWS concurred with the FAA’s determination that it 

is unlikely that any federally listed threatened or endangered species occur within the proposed 

site boundaries; therefore, no impacts to these species are expected. 

Cultural/Native American Resources

The proposed locations where construction activities would occur for the launch site contain two 

archaeological sites determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. 

Mitigation measures have been proposed to protect these sites during construction. If previously 

unknown cultural deposits are discovered, construction activities in the area would halt, and a 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ES-7 

qualified archaeologist would evaluate the discovery. Appropriate treatment activities would be 

determined, if necessary, in consultation with the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer 

(SHPO). Direct impacts to cultural resources from maintenance or operating activities would be 

unlikely since these activities would take place within areas already disturbed by construction. 

The FAA, SHPO, and Blue Origin signed a Memorandum of Agreement regarding avoidance of 

adverse effects to site 41CU695 and mitigation of adverse effects to site 41CU696, Culberson 

County, Texas. 

Hazardous Materials/Waste Management 

The construction activities would use small quantities of hazardous materials, which would result 

in generation of small volumes of hazardous wastes. The hazardous materials that are expected 

to be used are common to construction activities and include diesel fuel, gasoline, and liquefied 

natural gas to fuel the construction equipment, hydraulic fluids, oils and lubricants, welding 

gases, paints, solvents, adhesives, and batteries. Appropriate hazardous material management 

techniques would be followed to minimize their use and ensure safe disposal. 

Nonhazardous and hazardous waste generated during construction of the launch site would 

include construction debris, empty containers, spent solvents, waste oil, spill cleanup materials 

(if used), and lead-acid batteries from construction equipment. Blue Origin would ensure that 

construction contractors safely remove these wastes from the site for recycling or disposal in 

accordance with applicable federal, state and local requirements. 

The hazardous material management practices described above for construction would also be 

followed during launch site operations. The majority of the hazardous materials used in launch 

operations are the propellants for the launch vehicle and compressed gases. Other hazardous 

materials would be used in much smaller amounts with on site storage limited to less than 379 

liters (100 gallons). Substantial impacts to the environment are not expected from the presence 

of hazardous materials and wastes during launch site operations. 

Land Use (including Farmland and Section 4(f) Resources)

Construction of the launch site would permanently cover about 90.3 hectares (223 acres) of 

desert scrubland with impermeable surfaces, such as building foundations, test pad, parking lots, 

etc. This relatively small area represents 1.2 percent of the launch site. Operation of the launch 

site would necessitate the fencing and enclosure of approximately 7,527 hectares (18,600 acres) 

of desert scrubland and grassland that are currently used as a private wildlife management area. 

This acreage will continue to provide habitat for wildlife, particularly species that are more 

tolerant of noise and human presence. Land use would be essentially unchanged; only the core 

facility areas would be converted to industrial use. 

No farmlands or agricultural use lands are located on the proposed site. No prime farmland, 

unique farmland, farmland of state importance, or general farmland would be converted to a nonagricultural use as a result of the proposed action. No conflicts with existing agricultural uses 

would occur as a result of the proposed action. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ES-8 

Section 4(f) properties would not be significantly impacted by the proposed action because it 

does not require the use of any section 4(f) properties, and it does not create a “constructive use” 

that substantially impairs the properties. Section 4(f) properties are not substantially impaired 

because the impacts of the proposed action are not sufficiently serious that the value of the site in 

terms of its prior significance and enjoyment are substantially reduced or lost. 

Visual Resources

During construction, the visual landscape would be impacted primarily by construction activities 

associated with the two launch site access road improvements that would intersect State 

Highway 54 and the associated vehicle traffic traveling to and from the launch site. This is 

because the launch site facilities would be built eight kilometers (five miles) to the east of State 

Highway 54. Facilities and infrastructure including buildings, storage tanks, launch and landing 

pads, access roads, parking areas, fencing, and lighting would be constructed. A fire break 

would be cleared along the perimeter fence to prevent the spread of fire on or off the launch site. 

The tallest building would be approximately 26 meters (84 feet) high, and would be located eight 

kilometers (five miles) to the east of State Highway 54. Portions of the facility may be visible to 

motorists traveling on Highway 54, but the proposed construction and operation of the facility 

would not result in a significant impact on visual resources. 

Noise

Construction activities would include excavating, digging and pouring foundations, erecting 

buildings, and developing roads and utilities. These activities would temporarily increase the 

ambient noise levels at the proposed launch site. Such activities could potentially create 

individual noise sources ranging from 70 to 100 A-weighted decibels (dBA) at 30.5 meters (100 

feet) from the activities. Traffic noise from commuting workers and trucks on the road to the 

launch complex would also increase. The construction-related noise could last approximately 12 

months, but would not be appreciable off site, given the size of the property and the distance of 

the construction activities from the surrounding population. 

The nearest public access to the launch and landing platforms would be approximately 8.5 

kilometers (5.3 miles) away on Highway 54. Launch noise at that location would be 

approximately 85 dBA, approximately the same as that experienced by a person standing 9.1 

meters (30 feet) from a highway when a heavy truck passes. The nearest residence is 

approximately 10.9 kilometers (6.8 miles) away and would experience slightly less than 85 dBA. 

The noise would be much lower in frequency than the truck example, and thus typically less 

irritating to humans. The duration of launch noise would be approximately one minute, with the 

peak noise lasting from 5 to 15 seconds after launch. The nearest population center, Van Horn, 

is approximately 40.2 kilometers (25 miles) away. At this distance, the launch noise would be 

less than 65 dBA, the threshold of significance. 

Because Blue Origin’s launch vehicle would ascend and descend vertically, sonic booms would 

propagate away from the Earth's surface during launch and towards the Earth's surface during 

descent. The peak overpressure, 7.8 kilograms per square meter (1.6 pounds per square foot), 

would occur at approximately 1.3 kilometers (0.8 mile) from the landing pad. At the closest 

location that would be occupied by workers or visitors, the overpressure would be 4.9 kilograms 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ES-9 

per square meter (1.0 pound per square foot), which approximates 85 dBA. At 12.9 kilometers 

(8 miles) the sonic boom sound level would drop to about 80 dBA, and at 37 kilometers (23 

miles) the sonic boom would probably be indiscernible. 

Geology and Soils (including Floodplains)

Construction activities have the potential to disturb approximately 308 hectares (760 acres) of 

soil. Of this total, approximately 90.3 hectares (223 acres) are expected to be permanently 

covered with impermeable surfaces such as buildings and parking areas. Because of the clay 

content of the site soils, it may be necessary to strip 0.3 to 1.2 meters (1 to 4 feet) below existing 

grade prior to construction of the facilities. Depending on the depth of excavation, the volume of 

soil excavated would range from approximately 10,930 to 43,800 cubic meters (14,300 to 57,300 

cubic yards). 

Soil erosion due to runoff and wind would be of concern during construction. Best construction 

management practices would be employed to limit soil loss below significant levels. 

The proposed site would not be located in the 100-year floodplain (Federal Emergency 

Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map); however, localized flooding is possible. The 

potential for flooding in the proposed facility areas is low. 

Socioeconomics (including Natural Resources and Energy Supply) 

Construction would require a monthly average of approximately 45 workers. Virtually all the 

workers would have permanent residences outside of the immediate area. However, some of the 

wages and salaries earned by these construction workers would help to stimulate the local 

economy and would create a small number of additional indirect jobs. The economic benefit 

would be small; however, because the bulk of the construction-generated wages would be spent 

in the home communities of the construction workers. 

Staffing for the daily operations phase of the proposed project is expected to be 20 to 35 

personnel. Although the professional staff would likely be imported to the area, a portion of the 

security and support personnel would be expected to be drawn from the local area. The 

additional employment opportunities created by the proposed action would have modest impact 

on the employment statistics for the area. The proposed action would represent an increase of 

less than one percent in the region’s labor force. 

In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, the proposed action was examined to identify any 

proposed major changes in stationary facilities or the movement of ground vehicles that would 

have a measurable effect on local supplies of energy or natural resources. If there are major 

changes, power companies or other suppliers of energy would be contacted to determine if 

projected demands can be met by existing or planned source facilities. The use of natural 

resources other than for fuel need be examined only if the action involves a need for unusual 

materials or those in short supply. The proposed action does not create any major changes that 

would have a measurable effect on local supplies of energy or natural resources. The proposed 

action does not utilize unusual materials or materials in short supply. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ES-10 

Traffic and Transportation

Highway 54 would be the road most impacted by construction activities. It is the only access to 

the construction site and is an infrequently used highway. During the peak period of 

construction, approximately 70 construction workers would be commuting to the site. The 

monthly average construction workforce is expected to be approximately 45. In addition there 

would be deliveries of equipment, supplies, and building materials on a daily basis. Highway 54 

is expected to undergo improvements at the beginning of 2006; therefore no deterioration of the 

highway should occur. 

During facility operations, the commuting workforce would be approximately 20 to 35 workers. 

During launches, customers and other visitors would be visiting the site. Shipments of rocket 

propellants would be needed to fuel the launch vehicles. There would also be shipments of 

gaseous helium and nitrogen. Diesel fuel would be needed for diesel generators. There would 

be other shipments of supplies and materials. However, the traffic from operations is expected to 

be less than that for construction. Existing roads would be well able to handle the traffic without 

congestion. 

Water Resources (including Wetlands and Wild and Scenic Rivers)

Construction activities would require an estimated 5.7 to 7.6 liters (1.5 to 2 gallons) per minute 

continuous flow of ground water for a period of one year. Launch site operations water use rates 

would be less than 11.4 liters (3 gallons) per minute, continuous flow. Drawdown from the Salt 

Bolson aquifer, assuming double the expected average withdrawal rate is pumped from a single 

well, would be 6.8 centimeters (2.7 inches) at 9.1 meters (30 feet) from the well after 10 years of 

pumping; the drawdown would decrease to 1.0 centimeter (0.39 inch) at 1,609 meters (1 mile) 

from the well. Measured flow rates of some existing wells greatly exceed 11.4 meters (3 

gallons) per minute. Thus, the impacts of water withdrawal on other possible on site and off site 

water uses would not be significant. If it is necessary to screen new wells in the more productive 

Capitan aquifer, then the drawdown for construction withdrawal would be 0.57 centimeter (0.22 

inch) at 9.1 meters (30 feet), decreasing to 0.087 centimeter (0.034 inch) at 1,609 meters (1 mile) 

from the well. 

No ponds would be used for water storage. The launch site would use a combination of 

wastewater treatment and septic systems. Effluent from the wastewater treatment plant would be 

discharged to an on site pond. The launch site design would incorporate water management 

methods for all building sites, parking lots and areas where a change in grading or ground cover 

has occurred as a result of construction. Facilities in which potentially contaminated wastewater 

or solutions may be inadvertently discharged would have fixed containment barriers. 

There are no permanent, naturally occurring surface waters or open freshwater systems, or 

federally protected wetlands, as defined by section 404 of the Clean Water Act, on the proposed 

site. The only wild and scenic river in Texas is a 307-kilometer (191-mile) stretch of the United 

States side of the Rio Grande River along the Mexican border beginning in Big Bend National 

Park. There are no wetlands or wild and scenic rivers within the ROI for this project; therefore, 

there would be no impacts to either of these resources. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ES-11 

Airspace

The airspace above and around the launch site is used by commercial and military aircraft. Prior 

to scheduling flight countdown activities, Blue Origin would request the Federal Aviation 

Administration’s approval for exclusive use of the airspace directly above the launch site for a 

specific launch and recovery time window, expected to not exceed three hours. The steep flight 

ascent profile of the Blue Origin reusable launch vehicle ensures that at no time in any nominal 

ballistic trajectory would the vehicle’s ground track depart from the boundaries of the Corn 

Ranch. 

Environmental Justice

Because construction and operations impacts would not significantly impact the surrounding 

population, and no minority or low-income populations would be disproportionately affected, no 

disproportionately high and adverse impacts would be expected on minority or low-income 

populations. 

Health and Safety 

Based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data for the five-year period between 1997-2001, it was 

estimated that during construction, 1.8 total lost workdays, no fatalities, and 3.8 total recordable 

cases of injury, illness, or death could be expected during the 12-month construction period. 

Using the same statistical data it was estimated that 0.5 total lost workdays, no fatalities, and 1 

recordable case of injury, illness, or death could be expected from the operation of the Blue 

Origin facility. 

There are no health impacts expected to members of the public (adults or children) from the 

operation of the proposed launch site. Therefore, the requirements of Executive Order 13045, 

“Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” are not applicable to 

this action. 

During the operation of the vehicle, there is the possibility of an accident or off-nominal 

situation. In the majority of foreseeable off-nominal scenarios, the crew capsule, abort module, 

and propulsion module would all land within the perimeter fence of the launch site. In some rare 

cases, the vehicles may land outside the fence line. However, in nearly all cases, the vehicles 

will stay within the boundaries of private land controlled by Blue Origin and present no danger 

to the public. In the unlikely event the vehicles impact outside the privately controlled Blue 

Origin land, the surrounding properties consist of extremely sparsely populated rangeland. 

During any landing away from the landing pad, the potential exists for crushing vegetation and 

animals as the vehicle touches down to ground, fire, and, for the propulsion module and abort 

module, the dispersal of unused propellant. 

Current activities at the proposed launch site require very limited use of hazardous materials 

(fuel for portable generator) or waste management. There is currently no hazardous waste or 

wastewater generation. Therefore, there are no safety and health risks to workers or members of 

the public associated with the proposed Blue Origin site. 
 

This page intentionally left blank.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

i 

Table of Contents 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....................................................................ES-1 

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................vii 

1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION .................................................... 1-1 

1.1 Introduction..........................................................................................................1-1 

1.2 Background.......................................................................................................... 1-3 

1.3 Purpose and Need for Action...............................................................................1-5 

1.4 Public Involvement .............................................................................................. 1-5 

1.5 Prior Environmental Analyses .............................................................................1-6 

2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ..................2-1 

2.1 The Proposed Action............................................................................................ 2-1 

2.1.1 Blue Origin New Shepard Reusable Launch System ........................... 2-3 

2.1.2 New Shepard Prototype Test Vehicles ................................................. 2-4 

2.1.3 Development Schedule .........................................................................2-5 

2.1.4 Ground Facilities, Operational Processes and Flow Description..........2-5 

2.1.5 Proposed Activities .............................................................................2-12 

2.1.6 Permits, Licenses and Approvals........................................................2-13 

2.2 No Action Alternative........................................................................................2-13 

2.3 Launch Site Alternatives.................................................................................... 2-14 

2.3.1 Alternative Locations Considered and Dismissed ..............................2-14 

2.3.2 Alternative Sites Considered in Culberson County ............................ 2-14 

2.3.3 Alternative Facility Configurations and Locations for Proposed Blue 

Origin Facilities in Culberson County, Texas.....................................2-16 

3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT....................................................................................... 3-1 

3.1 Air Resources....................................................................................................... 3-1 

3.1.1 Definition of Resource..........................................................................3-1 

3.1.2 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................3-2 

3.1.3 Region of Influence............................................................................... 3-4 

3.1.4 Existing Conditions...............................................................................3-4 

3.2 Ecological Resources...........................................................................................3-7 

3.2.1 Definition of Resource..........................................................................3-7 

3.2.2 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................3-7 

3.2.3 Region of Influence............................................................................... 3-8 

3.2.4 Existing Conditions...............................................................................3-8 

3.3 Cultural/Native American Resources ................................................................3-15 

3.3.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-15 

3.3.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-16 

3.3.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-17 

3.3.4 Existing Conditions.............................................................................3-17 

3.4 Hazardous Materials/Waste Management .........................................................3-21 

3.4.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-21 

3.4.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-21 

3.4.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-22 

3.4.4 Existing Conditions.............................................................................3-22 

3.5 Land Use (including Farmland and Section 4(f) Resources).............................3-22 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

ii 

3.5.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-22 

3.5.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-23 

3.5.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-23 

3.5.4 Existing Conditions.............................................................................3-23 

3.6 Visual Resources................................................................................................3-24 

3.6.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-24 

3.6.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-25 

3.6.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-25 

3.6.4 Existing Conditions.............................................................................3-25 

3.7 Noise .................................................................................................................. 3-28

3.7.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-28 

3.7.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-28 

3.7.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-29 

3.7.4 Existing Conditions.............................................................................3-29 

3.8 Geology and Soils (including Floodplains) .......................................................3-29 

3.8.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-29 

3.8.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-30 

3.8.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-30 

3.8.4 Existing Conditions.............................................................................3-31 

3.9 Socioeconomics (including Natural Resources and Energy Supply) ................3-35 

3.9.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-35 

3.9.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-35 

3.9.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-35 

3.9.4 Existing Conditions.............................................................................3-36 

3.10 Traffic and Transportation ................................................................................. 3-38 

3.10.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-38 

3.10.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-39 

3.10.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-39 

3.10.4 Existing Conditions.............................................................................3-39 

3.11 Water Resources (including Wetlands and Wild and Scenic Rivers)................3-40 

3.11.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-40 

3.11.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-40 

3.11.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-40 

3.11.4 Existing Condition ..............................................................................3-40 

3.12 Airspace .............................................................................................................3-47 

3.12.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-47 

3.12.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-47 

3.12.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-47 

3.12.4 Existing Conditions.............................................................................3-48 

3.13 Environmental Justice........................................................................................3-48 

3.13.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-48 

3.13.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-49 

3.13.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-50 

3.13.4 Existing Conditions.............................................................................3-50 

3.14 Health and Safety...............................................................................................3-52 

3.14.1 Definition of Resource........................................................................3-52 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

iii 

3.14.2 Regulatory Setting ..............................................................................3-52 

3.14.3 Region of Influence............................................................................. 3-53 

3.14.4 Existing Conditions.............................................................................3-53 

3.15 References.......................................................................................................... 3-54 

4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...................................................................... 4-1 

4.1 Air Resources....................................................................................................... 4-1 

4.1.1 Proposed Action....................................................................................4-1 

4.1.2 No Action Alternative...........................................................................4-7 

4.2 Ecological Resources...........................................................................................4-7 

4.2.1 Proposed Action....................................................................................4-7 

4.2.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-15 

4.3 Cultural/Native American Resources ................................................................4-15 

4.3.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-16 

4.3.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-18 

4.4 Hazardous Materials/Waste Management .........................................................4-18 

4.4.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-18 

4.4.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-24 

4.5 Land Use (including Farmland and Section 4(f) Resources).............................4-24 

4.5.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-24 

4.5.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-25 

4.6 Visual Resources................................................................................................4-25 

4.6.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-25 

4.6.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-27 

4.7 Noise .................................................................................................................. 4-27

4.7.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-27 

4.7.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-31 

4.8 Geology and Soils (including Floodplains) .......................................................4-31 

4.8.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-31 

4.8.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-35 

4.9 Socioeconomics (including Natural Resources and Energy Supply) ................4-35 

4.9.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-35 

4.9.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-38 

4.10 Traffic and Transportation ................................................................................. 4-38 

4.10.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-38 

4.10.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-39 

4.11 Water Resources (including Wetlands and Wild and Scenic Rivers)................4-39 

4.11.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-40 

4.11.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-44 

4.12 Airspace .............................................................................................................4-44 

4.12.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-44 

4.12.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-45 

4.13 Environmental Justice........................................................................................4-45 

4.13.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-45 

4.13.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-47 

4.14 Health and Safety...............................................................................................4-47 

4.14.1 Proposed Action..................................................................................4-47 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

iv 

4.14.2 No Action Alternative.........................................................................4-51 

4.15 Cumulative Impacts ...........................................................................................4-51 

5 MITIGATION.................................................................................................................. 5-1 

5.1 Air Resources....................................................................................................... 5-1 

5.2 Ecological Resources...........................................................................................5-1 

5.3 Cultural/Native American Resources ..................................................................5-1 

5.4 Hazardous Materials/Waste Management ...........................................................5-2 

5.5 Land Use (including Farmland and Section 4(f) Resources)...............................5-2 

5.6 Visual Resources..................................................................................................5-3 

5.7 Noise .................................................................................................................... 5-3 

5.8 Geology and Soils (including Floodplains) .........................................................5-3 

5.9 Socioeconomics (including Natural Resources and Energy Supply) ..................5-3 

5.10 Traffic and Transportation ................................................................................... 5-3 

5.11 Ground Water Resources (including Wetlands and Wild and Scenic Rivers).....5-4 

5.12 Airspace ...............................................................................................................5-4

5.13 Environmental Justice..........................................................................................5-4 

6 LIST OF PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS .......................................................... 6-1 

7 AGENCIES CONTACTED.............................................................................................7-1 

8 DISTRIBUTION LIST .................................................................................................... 8-1 

APPENDIX A – PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING SUMMARY..................................... A-1 

A.1 Introduction......................................................................................................... A-1 

A.2 Public Information Meetings – June 14, 2005, Van Horn, Texas (58 attendees)A-2 

A.3 Public Information Meetings – June 15, 2005, Dell City, Texas (31 attendees) A-2 

A.4 Public Hearing on Draft EA – July 25, 2006, Van Horn, Texas (42 attendees)..A-3 

APPENDIX B – AGENCY CONSULTATIONS ...................................................................... B-1 

APPENDIX C – BIOLOGICAL SURVEY................................................................................ C-1 

C.1 Vegetation........................................................................................................... C-1 

C.2 Wildlife ...............................................................................................................C_4 

C.2.1 Birds..................................................................................................... C-4 

C.2.2 Mammals.............................................................................................. C-5 

C.2.3 Reptiles and Amphibians ..................................................................... C-6 

APPENDIX D - RESPONSE TO COMMENTS........................................................................ D-1 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

v 

Table of Exhibits 

Exhibit 1-1. Site Location .....................................................................................................1-2 

Exhibit 2-1. Launch Site Layout Map...................................................................................2-2 

Exhibit 2-2. Alternative Launch Sites.................................................................................2-15 

Exhibit 3-1. Comparison of Air Concentrations in Nearby Counties with NAAQS ............ 3-6 

Exhibit 3-2. Estimated Annual Emissions for Culberson County, Texas.............................3-6 

Exhibit 3-3. Vegetation Communities ..................................................................................3-9 

Exhibit 3-4. Special Status Species in Culberson County, Texas....................................... 3-12 

Exhibit 3-5. Area of Potential Effect ..................................................................................3-18 

Exhibit 3-6. Prehistoric and Historic Sites Identified in the APE....................................... 3-20 

Exhibit 3-7. View of Proposed Launch Site Looking Northeast toward the Delaware 

Mountains from State Highway 54.................................................................3-26 

Exhibit 3-8. View from the Ridge on Proposed Site Looking to the West toward the Sierra 

Diablo Mountains............................................................................................ 3-26 

Exhibit 3-9. State Highway 54 at the Corn Ranch Facing Northeast .................................3-27 

Exhibit 3-10. Seismic Hazard Map.......................................................................................3-32 

Exhibit 3-11. Topographic Map............................................................................................ 3-34 

Exhibit 3-12. Largest Employment Sectors by Industry – 2003...........................................3-36 

Exhibit 3-13. Employment Trends........................................................................................3-37 

Exhibit 3-14. Ground Water Hydrology ...............................................................................3-41 

Exhibit 3-15. Geohydrologic Cross-Section .........................................................................3-42 

Exhibit 3-16. Well Locations Map........................................................................................ 3-45 

Exhibit 3-17. Ground Water Quality at Site Water Wells ....................................................3-46 

Exhibit 3-18. Airspace Usage ...............................................................................................3-48

Exhibit 3-19. Census 2000 Racial and Ethnic Characteristics.............................................. 3-51 

Exhibit 3-20. Percent of Households below Poverty Level.................................................. 3-52 

Exhibit 4-1. Construction Equipment On site by Type and Number per Month..................4-2 

Exhibit 4-2. Estimated Maximum Annual Emissions of Criteria Pollutants from Construction 

at the Launch Site..............................................................................................4-3 

Exhibit 4-3. Comparison of Maximum Annual Emissions from Construction to Culberson 

County Baseline Conditions ............................................................................. 4-4 

Exhibit 4-4. Comparison of Predicted Maximum Downwind Concentrations Due to 

Construction Activities to NAAQS .................................................................. 4-4 

Exhibit 4-5. Estimated Annual Emissions of Criteria Pollutants from Operation of the 

Launch Sitea

, tons per year ...............................................................................4-6 

Exhibit 4-6. Areas Impacted by Construction Activities ......................................................4-8 

Exhibit 4-7. Peak and Attenuated Noise (in dBA) Levels Expected from Operation of 

Construction Equipmenta

................................................................................ 4-11 

Exhibit 4-8. Hazardous Materials Use and Waste Management at the Proposed Blue Origin 

Launch Site .....................................................................................................4-19 

Exhibit 4-9. Predicted Overall Sound Levels from a Hypothetical Taurus Launch at the Blue 

Origin Launch Site..........................................................................................4-28 

Exhibit 4-10. Geologic Site Map .......................................................................................... 4-33 

Exhibit 4-11. Proposed Locations of New Wells..................................................................4-41 

Exhibit 4-12. Waste Treatment Facilities .............................................................................4-43 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

vi 

Exhibit 4-13. Census Tracts Containing the Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

and Contained in the Socioeconomic ROI......................................................4-46 

Exhibit 4-14. Injury, Illness, and Fatality Estimates for the 12-month Construction Phase of 

the Proposed Launch Site................................................................................ 4-48 

Exhibit 4-15. Injury, Illness, and Fatality Estimates for Operation of the Proposed Launch Site 

 ......................................................................................................................... 4-48 

Exhibit C-1. Vegetation Communities ................................................................................. C-2 

Exhibit D-1. Summary of the Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment ............ D-1 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

vii 

ACRONYMS and ABBREVIATIONS 

AGL Above Ground Level 

APE Area of Potential Effect 

AST Office of Commercial Space Transportation 

ATC Air Traffic Control 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CC Crew Capsule 

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CO Carbon Monoxide 

CO2 Carbon Dioxide 

dB Decibel 

DOT Department of Transportation 

EA Environmental Assessment 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

EO Executive Order 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FCC Federal Communications Commission 

FR Federal Register 

FTE Full Time Equivalent 

HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant 

HCl Hydrogen Chloride 

HTP High Test (Hydrogen) Peroxide 

IIP Instantaneous Impact Point 

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NO2 Nitrogen dioxide 

NOX Nitrogen oxides 

National Register National Register of Historical Places 

OCC Operations Control Center 

O3 Ozone 

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Act 

PM Particulate Matter 

PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

RCS Reaction Control System 

RLV Reusable Launch Vehicle 

ROI Region of Influence 

RP-1 Rocket Propellant-1 

SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer 

SO2 Sulfur dioxide 

TAC Texas Administrative Code 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

viii 

TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

USAF United States Air Force 

U.S. United States 

USCB United States Census Bureau 

U.S.C. United States Code 

USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service 

USGS United States Geological Survey 

VOC Volatile Organic Compound 

VPF Vehicle Processing Facility 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

1-1 

1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION 

1.1 Introduction 

Blue Origin, LLC (Blue Origin) is a commercial venture that wants to operate reusable launch 

vehicles (RLVs) from a privately-owned launch site in the southwestern United States (U.S.). 

Blue Origin proposes to construct and operate a commercial space launch site to be located on 

privately-owned property in Culberson County, Texas (Exhibit 1-1). Blue Origin proposes to 

develop this site to launch RLVs carrying space flight participants1

 on suborbital, ballistic 

trajectories to altitudes in excess of 99,060 meters (325,000 feet) above sea level. Operations at 

the launch facility would include pre-flight processing, launch, flight, landing, and recovery 

activities. To accommodate these operations, Blue Origin proposes to construct a vehicle 

processing facility, launch complex, vehicle landing and recovery area, space flight participant 

training facility, and other minor support facilities. 

To conduct commercial launch operations, Blue Origin must obtain authorization from the 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Under the proposed action the FAA would issue 

experimental permits, a launch site operator license, RLV mission-specific licenses, and/or RLV 

operator licenses, as appropriate. 

An experimental permit would allow Blue Origin to conduct testing of reusable suborbital 

rockets that would be launched solely for 

• Research and development to test new design concepts, new equipment, or new operating 

techniques; 

• Showing compliance with requirements as part of the process for obtaining a license; and 

• Crew training prior to obtaining a license for a launch using the design of the rocket for 

which the permit would be issued. 

An RLV mission-specific license authorizing an RLV mission authorizes a licensee to launch 

and reenter, or otherwise land, one model or type of RLV from a launch site approved for the 

mission to a reentry site or other location approved for the mission. A mission-specific license 

authorizing an RLV mission may authorize more than one RLV mission and identifies each 

 

1

 Space flight participant means an individual, who is not crew, carried within a launch vehicle or reentry vehicle. 

49 United States Code (U.S.C.) § 70102(17) Flight crew means any employee of a licensee or transferee, or of a 

contractor or subcontractor of a licensee or transferee, who is on board a launch or reentry vehicle and performs 

activities in the course of that employment directly relating to the launch, reentry, or other operation of the launch 

vehicle or reentry vehicle. See 49 U.S.C. § 70102(2) (defining crew). 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

1-2 

Exhibit 1-1. Site Location 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

1-3 

flight of an RLV authorized under the license. An RLV operator license authorizes a licensee to 

launch and reenter, or otherwise land, any of a designated family of RLVs within authorized 

parameters. A licensee’s authorization to conduct RLV missions terminates upon completion of 

all activities authorized by the license, or the expiration date stated in the reentry license, 

whichever comes first. Issuance of an experimental permit or license does not relieve its holder 

of the obligation to comply with any other laws or regulations, nor does it confer any proprietary, 

property, or exclusive right in the use of airspace or outer space. (14 Code of Federal Regulations 

[CFR] 420.41) 

The FAA is the lead Federal agency responsible for authorizing the proposed launch activities at 

the Blue Origin facility. Issuing permits and licenses are Federal actions and are subject to 

review as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, 

42 United States Code (U.S.C.) § 4321, et. seq. 

Under NEPA, this Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared to describe the proposed 

action and alternatives considered, the affected environment, the potential effects of the proposed 

action on that environment, and measures to be taken to mitigate those potential effects. 

1.2 Background 

The FAA, in accordance with its responsibilities under Title 49, U.S.C., Subtitle IX, Sections 

70101-70121 (formerly the Commercial Space Launch Act), designated the Office of 

Commercial Space Transportation (AST) to regulate the commercial space launch industry by 

licensing launches and reentries occurring in the U.S. and those conducted by U.S. citizens 

outside of the U.S., and the operation of facilities that support these activities. The purpose of 

AST’s oversight of commercial space transportation activities, as defined by Congress in 

49 U.S.C. Subtitle IX, Ch. 701, § 70101(b), is 

• To promote economic growth and entrepreneurial activity through use of the space 

environment for peaceful purposes; 

• To encourage the U.S. private sector to provide launch vehicles, reentry vehicles, and 

associated services by 

 Simplifying and expediting the issuance and transfer of commercial licenses, and 

 Facilitating and encouraging the use of government-developed space technology; 

• To ensure that the Secretary of Transportation provides oversight and coordinates the 

conduct of commercial launch and reentry operations, issue and transfer commercial licenses 

authorizing those operations, and protects the public health and safety, safety of property, and 

national security and foreign policy interests of the U.S.; and 

• To facilitate the strengthening and expansion of the U.S. space transportation infrastructure, 

including the enhancement of U.S. launch sites and launch-site support facilities, and 

development of reentry sites, with Federal, state, and private sector involvement, to support 

the full range of U.S. space-related activities. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

1-4 

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing the Procedural 

Provisions of NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1500-1508), and FAA Order 

1050.1E, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, direct FAA lead agency officials to 

consider the environmental consequences when planning for, authorizing, and approving Federal 

actions. When the FAA issues a license or permit, it is considered a Federal action and is subject 

to review as required by NEPA. FAA Order 1050.1E states that for actions subject to NEPA that 

do not qualify for a categorical exclusion, like those proposed by Blue Origin, an EA or 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required. An EA is an analysis of environmental 

consequences of a proposed action and reasonable alternatives (including no action), cumulative 

impacts, and mitigation actions. The purpose of an EA is to determine whether a proposed 

action or its alternatives has the potential to significantly affect the environment. If the EA 

indicates that the proposed action’s impacts would meet or exceed a significance threshold for 

the affected resource or resources, or that mitigation would not reduce the significant impacts 

below the applicable threshold, the FAA must prepare an EIS. FAA Order 1050.1E states that an 

EIS provides additional, detailed evaluations of the proposed action and its alternatives including 

the no action alternative. This EA has been prepared to support the NEPA analysis for this 

proposed action. The FAA is the lead Federal agency for this NEPA process. 

Under this proposed action, the FAA would issue appropriate experimental permits and/or 

licenses to Blue Origin, which would allow Blue Origin to launch and land vertical 

launch/vertical landing reusable suborbital rockets. In addition to the environmental review and 

determination, the FAA must complete a policy review and approval, safety review and 

approval, payload review and determination, and a financial responsibility determination. 

However, this EA only analyzes potential environmental impacts from the proposed project. 

Safety and policy implications of the proposed project that are outside the scope of the 

environmental impacts analysis are analyzed in documents other than this EA. The FAA 

licenses and permits launches based on the evaluation of the safety of the proposed activities and 

their associated environmental impacts. 

Upon issuance of the required FAA experimental permit(s) and/or license(s), Blue Origin would 

be able to conduct commercial launch operations. Early developmental and test flights may be 

conducted under experimental permits, which would also require an environmental and safety 

review by the FAA. Blue Origin may also seek to obtain a launch site operator license from the 

FAA. Blue Origin may also seek RLV mission-specific licenses and RLV operator licenses, as 

appropriate. The issuance of these types of experimental permits and licenses requires an 

environmental and safety review. The FAA may use the analysis in this document as the basis 

for an environmental determination of the impacts of these launches whether they are conducted 

under experimental permits, launch site operator licenses, RLV mission-specific licenses, RLV 

operator licenses, or any combination of these. 

Blue Origin’s operations would be conducted from a site located on privately-owned land 

located between Van Horn, Texas and the Guadalupe Mountains National Park. The proposed 

operation would require the construction of a number of support facilities on the site, including 

upgraded roads, operations and storage buildings, a launch and a landing pad, and others. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

1-5 

1.3 Purpose and Need for Action 

Purpose 

The proposed Blue Origin launch facility would provide Blue Origin with an alternative to 

launching the New Shepard vehicle from a Federal or other FAA-licensed launch facility. The 

proposed facility would provide a location from which to transport space flight participants to the 

edge of space and return them to the same launch area after a short flight. These activities are 

consistent with the purposes of the CSLA. Given the infrastructure and development costs 

associated with constructing launch facilities, the Federal government has been the 

owner/operator of, has leased/sold unused or excess infrastructure, and has provided expertise to 

commercial launch operators for the majority of commercial launches. However, with increasing 

demand for access to space, commercial launch site operators have begun to develop proposals 

to offer launch sites, not collocated with Federal facilities or operated by the Department of 

Defense and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), to meet the demand for 

lower cost access to space. 

Need 

The proposed Blue Origin launch site would provide the infrastructure necessary to support 

testing and operation of Blue Origin’s New Shepard RLV. Accordingly, the proposed action 

would permit Blue Origin to pursue its objective of developing safe, inexpensive and reliable 

human access to space. 

1.4 Public Involvement 

The CEQ implementing regulations for NEPA describe the public involvement requirements for 

agencies. (40 CFR 1506.6) Public participation in the NEPA process not only provides for and 

encourages open communication between the FAA and the public, but also promotes better 

decision making. Blue Origin hosted two public information meetings on June 14, 2005 in Van 

Horn, Texas and June 15, 2005 in Dell City, Texas. Each of these public information meetings 

was preceded by announcements that ran in local newspapers (i.e., the Van Horn Advocate, the 

Hudspeth County Herald & Dell Valley Review, and the Midland Reporter-Telegram). Each 

announcement was published in English and Spanish. During the meetings, Spanish translators 

were present. More than one hundred members of the public attended the meetings. 

Representatives from the FAA and Blue Origin provided information briefings and answered the 

public’s direct questions. Additional opportunities for the public to comment were provided by 

the distribution of question and comment cards and the e-mail address for the FAA 

representative. In addition, copies of the briefing given by the FAA were made available to the 

public. The Notice of Availability of the Draft EA was published in the Federal Register on 

June 28, 2006 (71 FR 36870). The Notice asked the public to submit comments via mail, e-mail, 

or fax by July 27, 2006. The FAA hosted a public hearing on the Draft EA on July 25, 2006 at 

the Van Horn Convention Center in Van Horn, Texas. The hearing was preceded by 

announcements that ran in local newspapers (i.e., the Van Horn Advocate, the Hudspeth County 

Herald – Dell Valley Review, and the Midland Reporter-Telegram). More than 40 members of 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

1-6 

the public attended the meeting. Further details regarding these meetings are provided in 

Appendix A of this EA. 

Fourteen tribes and Native American organizations with potential regional ties to the TransPecos area were notified by the FAA of Blue Origin’s proposed activities in Culberson County, 

Texas. These tribes were notified in writing of the proposed activities and the FAA contacted 

each tribe by phone to further discuss their potential interests in the affected area. 

1.5 Prior Environmental Analyses 

The Department of Transportation (DOT) and NASA have previously analyzed the 

environmental effects of launches from a variety of locations. The documentation identified 

below has been incorporated by reference in this EA. The information and analyses contained in 

these documents were used in the development of this EA and have been summarized as 

appropriate. These EAs and EISs have previously been prepared to support launch systems that 

may be similar to the proposed Blue Origin operations. Other planning and site-specific 

documents that were used as references in the preparation of this EA are cited in Section 3.13 

and Section 4.16 of this document, as appropriate. 

• X-33 Advanced Technology Demonstrator Vehicle Program, Final Environmental Impact 

Statement, NASA, September 1997. 

• Environmental Assessment of the Kodiak Launch Complex, June 1996. 

• Final Environmental Assessment for the Launch Re-entry and Recovery Operations at the 

Kistler Launch Facility, Nevada Test Site, April 2002. 

• Final Environmental Assessment for the East Kern Airport District Launch Site Operator 

License for the Mojave Airport, February 2004. 

In accordance with the CEQ regulations for NEPA documents, this EA tiers from the following 

programmatic documents. 

• Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing Launches (PEIS LL), 

Department of Transportation, Office of the Associate Administrator for Commercial Space 

Transportation, May 24, 2001. 

• Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Horizontal Launch and Reentry of 

Reentry Vehicles, Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Office of 

Commercial Space Transportation, December 2005. 

Where applicable, relevant sections of these documents are summarized and referenced to 

eliminate repetitive discussion and to focus analysis in key decision areas. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-1

2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 

2.1 The Proposed Action 

The proposed action is for the FAA to issue one or more experimental permits and appropriate 

licenses to Blue Origin to authorize Blue Origin to conduct the activities described in this EA. 

Blue Origin proposes to launch space flight participant-carrying RLVs on suborbital, ballistic 

trajectories to altitudes in excess of 99,060 meters (325,000 feet) above mean sea level. The 

proposed location for the Blue Origin launch site is privately-owned land in Culberson County, 

Texas. Operations at the launch site would include pre-flight processing, launch, flight, landing, 

and recovery activities. 

To conduct these operations, Blue Origin proposes to construct a private launch site, including a 

vehicle processing facility, launch complex, vehicle landing and recovery area, a space flight 

participant training facility, and other minor support facilities. Descriptions of the specific 

facilities to be constructed at the proposed Blue Origin launch site are provided in Section 2.1.1.4 

of this EA. Exhibit 2-1 shows the relative location of these facilities on the Blue Origin site. 

Blue Origin proposes to develop, launch, and land a suborbital RLV referred to as the New 

Shepard Reusable Launch System. Blue Origin proposes to develop the New Shepard RLV 

incrementally, beginning with low-altitude vehicle testing, progressing to higher-altitude testing, 

and culminating with commercial flights. Early testing would use prototype vehicles that are 

smaller and/or less capable than the proposed end design. There would be fewer impacts 

associated with pre-commercial development and testing than those associated with the 

commercial activities described below. 

According to the FAA regulations, an applicant is responsible for providing the FAA with 

information sufficient to conduct environmental and policy reviews and determinations for the 

proposed action. This EA is intended to fulfill the NEPA requirements for issuing experimental 

permits and appropriate licenses to Blue Origin. The successful completion of the environmental 

review process does not guarantee that the FAA would issue these permits and/or licenses to 

Blue Origin. The project also must meet all FAA safety, risk, and financial responsibility 

requirements. Additional environmental analysis would be conducted for any activity proposed 

by Blue Origin that is not addressed in this EA or in previous environmental analyses. 

Description of the Proposed Commercial Launch and Reentry Activities 

Blue Origin proposes to develop and operate commercial launch and landing/recovery facilities 

for Blue Origin-developed RLVs. Each New Shepard RLV would be capable of transporting 

three or more space flight participants to the edge of space using a suborbital trajectory. 

Blue Origin proposes to construct a launch site, located on private property in Culberson County, 

Texas. This EA addresses the overall impacts to the environment of the proposed operations 

anticipated for the five-year period under consideration in this EA. A more detailed outline of 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-2

Exhibit 2-1. Launch Site Layout Map 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-3

the proposed schedule for Blue Origin’s operations is included in Section 2.1.1.3 of this EA. 

Blue Origin’s proposed activities would include 

• Construction of an RLV launch site and a landing/recovery area, 

• Launch and landing/recovery operations, 

• Space flight participant training activities, and 

• Sustained commercial launch, flight, landing and recovery of space flight participants. 

2.1.1 Blue Origin New Shepard Reusable Launch System 

The New Shepard RLV system would be comprised of a propulsion module and a crew capsule 

(CC) capable of carrying three or more space flight participants to space. The CC is stacked on 

top of the propulsion module. The stacked vehicle would have a roughly conical shape with a 

base diameter of approximately 7 meters (22 feet) and a height of approximately 15 meters (50 

feet). 

The propulsion module would be fully reusable, would carry its own avionics, and would operate 

autonomously under the control of on-board computers. The propulsion module would use 90 

percent concentration hydrogen peroxide, called high test peroxide (HTP) and rocket propellant 

(RP) grade kerosene as the propellants. The propulsion module would have a combined 

propellant load of HTP and RP of approximately 54,431 kilograms-mass (120,000 pounds-mass). 

The propulsion module would have a thrust capability of approximately 1,023,091 Newtons 

(230,000 pounds-force) at liftoff. The propulsion module may have a low-thrust Reaction 

Control System (RCS) using either monopropellant HTP or pressurized gas, such as helium or 

nitrogen, also known as a cold-gas system. 

The CC would also be fully reusable, would carry its own avionics, and would operate 

autonomously under the control of on-board computers. The cabin would be pressurized and 

have systems for maintaining temperature, humidity, and oxygen and carbon dioxide partial 

pressures. The CC would carry small solid rocket motors for use in an emergency abort 

situation. The solid rocket motors proposed for use have a DOT/Department of Defense 

explosive hazard classification of Class 1.3. Class 1.3 explosive hazards are described as 

materials that burn vigorously, but have limited explosive potential. These motors would be 

composed of an aluminum hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene composite propellant with a total 

mass of 500 kilograms-mass (1,100 pounds-mass) or less. These motors produce an average 

combined thrust of approximately 533,787 Newtons (120,000 pounds-force) approximately two 

seconds. The CC may have a low-thrust RCS using either monopropellant HTP or cold gas. 

The New Shepard RLV would have three possible flight scenarios - two nominal scenarios and 

one emergency scenario. In the first nominal scenario, the New Shepard RLV would perform a 

vertical takeoff from the test pad; fly a suborbital trajectory nearly straight up; shut down engines 

after approximately two minutes and coast to an altitude in excess of 99,060 meters (325,000 

feet) before descending; and restart its engines several thousand feet above the ground for a 

precision vertical powered landing on the landing pad. The time from engine restart to landing 

would be less than 15 seconds, and the propulsion module would use less than 444,822 Newtons 

(100,000 pounds-force) of thrust for landing. During this entire mission, the propulsion module 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-4

and CC would remain attached. Total mission time from liftoff to landing would be less than 10 

minutes. 

In the second nominal scenario, the New Shepard RLV would fly a similar trajectory as the first 

scenario during ascent, except that shortly after main engine cutoff, the propulsion module and 

CC would separate. The separation would be accomplished using a combination of springs and 

possibly a low-impulse RCS burn to assure collision avoidance. The small solid rocket motors 

used for emergency separation would not be ignited and would remain on the propulsion module 

as the CC separates. Both the propulsion module and CC would reach an altitude in excess of 

99,060 meters (325,000 feet) before beginning their descent. The propulsion module would 

perform a precision vertical powered landing on the landing pad as in the previous scenario, 

while the CC would land within the launch site perimeter fence using devices to induce 

atmospheric drag, such as parachutes. 

The emergency scenario involves the emergency separation of the CC from the propulsion 

module. If an anomaly is detected autonomously or if a command is sent by a ground operator 

prior to liftoff or during ascent flight, the propulsion module and CC would separate to protect 

space flight participant safety. Emergency separation would be accomplished by use of the small 

solid rocket motors on the CC. In this instance, the CC would be jettisoned and the propulsion 

module would attempt to land back at the landing pad if it is in-flight. After solid rocket motor 

burnout, an abort module containing the spent and any unfired solid rocket motors would be 

jettisoned from the CC and would follow a ballistic free-fall trajectory to the ground. The CC 

would also follow a ballistic free-fall trajectory to a predefined lower altitude, where a parachute 

or other drag system would deploy and return the crew capsule to the launch site recovery area 

safely. In some rare cases, the vehicles may land outside the fence line of the proposed launch 

site. However, in nearly all cases the vehicles would stay within the boundaries of private land 

controlled by Blue Origin and present no danger to the public. The vehicle’s thrust would be 

terminated if the RLV’s instantaneous impact point (IIP) moves more than 4 nautical miles from 

the test pad. In the unlikely event the vehicles impact outside the privately controlled Blue 

Origin land, the surrounding properties consist of extremely sparsely populated rangeland. 

2.1.2 New Shepard Prototype Test Vehicles 

Before flying the human-carrying operational New Shepard RLV for commercial operation, Blue 

Origin proposes to develop and flight test a series of unmanned prototypes at the West Texas 

launch site. The first of these vehicles would be a low-altitude demonstrator of the propulsion 

module using approximately 2,042 kilograms (4,500 pounds) of HTP as a monopropellant, 

capable of reaching an altitude of no more than 610 meters (2,000 feet) with a mission time of 

less than one minute. This first demonstrator vehicle, and all other New Shepard prototypes, 

would have less performance capability and therefore, fewer environmental impacts than the 

operational New Shepard RLV. The prototypes would use the same or a subset of the same 

types of propellants as the operational New Shepard RLV in smaller quantities; use the same 

ground facilities, infrastructure, and equipment; and generate less noise, less air pollution, and 

fewer impacts in all categories under study. Each new prototype would fly to higher altitudes 

and/or demonstrate additional subsystems than the previous prototype. Eventually, Blue Origin 

proposes to perform multiple flight tests of the actual operational New Shepard RLV system 

carrying Blue Origin personnel before commencing commercial operation. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-5

Rather than providing detailed information on potential configurations of these prototype 

vehicles, this study uses the final operational New Shepard RLV configuration as the basis for 

assessing environmental impacts. This analysis bounds the potential impacts of the earlier 

vehicles and results in a conservative analysis of the potential impacts associated with the testing 

and operation of RLVs from the proposed site. 

2.1.3 Development Schedule 

Blue Origin proposes to conduct the following activities at the West Texas launch site during the 

next five years. 

• 2006: The majority of facility construction at the site would occur during this period. In the 

third and fourth quarters of 2006, Blue Origin would ship the first prototype low-altitude test 

vehicle to the site and conduct the first flight tests. Ten or fewer flight tests could be 

conducted in 2006, each to an altitude of approximately 610 meters (2,000 feet) for less than 

one minute. 

• 2007-2009: Continued flight testing of prototype vehicles with incrementally increasing 

capability. During these years, Blue Origin proposes to gradually expand the operational 

envelope of its vehicles, conducting 25 or fewer launches per year. A wide range of tests are 

anticipated, ranging in altitude from under 610 meters (2,000) feet to greater than 99,060 

meters (325,000 feet), lasting one minute or less to over 10 minutes. Development tests of 

the crew capsule abort system would be conducted during this time frame. During this time, 

some construction to upgrade the facility would also occur, adding additional infrastructure 

to support the increasing capabilities of the system. 

• 2010: Commercial operations may commence with the operational New Shepard vehicle in 

this timeframe. The flight rate would depend on market demand, but Blue Origin anticipates 

rates up to approximately 52 launches per year of the New Shepard RLV. Although Blue 

Origin proposes to continue operations at roughly the same rate beyond the 2010 timeframe, 

these operations are outside the scope of this analysis and are analyzed in this EA only with 

respect to potential cumulative impacts. 

2.1.4 Ground Facilities, Operational Processes and Flow Description 

2.1.4.1 Ground Facilities 

Blue Origin intends to design and construct a launch site from which to complete development 

flight tests associated with RLV designs, as well as to conduct future roundtrip space flight 

participant flights to suborbital space. In general, the Blue Origin New Shepard launch system 

would require the construction of three primary functional areas within the launch site perimeter 

fence (see Exhibit 2-1). 

• Home Base area for assembly and pre-flight testing of the New Shepard RLV 

• Launch Complex consisting of the test pad and propellant storage area 

• Landing Pad 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-6

Other minor support facilities proposed to be developed include a guard security post of less than 

233 square meters (2,500 square feet) made of metal, wood or concrete, smooth-wire perimeter 

fence approximately 1.2 meters (4 feet) high and 34,412 meters (112,900 feet) long, under 20.9 

kilometers (13 miles) of access roads, approximately 744 square meters (8,000 square feet) of 

parking areas, and a metal, wood or concrete building of approximately 75 square meters (800 

square feet) as infrastructure for water distribution/wastewater management. 

At least two wells would be drilled for freshwater, which would be stored in ground-level metal 

tanks. The first tank would be near the Home Base. It would be 5.5 meters (18 feet) high and 

13.7 meters (45 feet) in diameter, and hold approximately 757,082 liters (200,000 gallons), fed 

by a pump with a capacity of 6,814 liters (1,800 gallons) per minute. The second tank would be 

located adjacent to the Launch Complex. It would be 5.5 meters (18 feet) high and 9.6 meters 

(32 feet) in diameter, holding approximately 378,541 liters (100,000 gallons), fed by three 

pumps each with a capacity of 2,839 liters (750 gallons) per minute. 

During the construction phase, a cement batch plant could be developed. A construction staging 

and material lay down area would be located on a site to the west of the vehicle processing 

facility. 

The following paragraphs describe each of the major ground facilities to be located on the launch 

site during flight operations. 

Home Base 

The Home Base area of the launch site would include the vehicle processing facility (VPF), the 

administrative support center, space flight participant training center, electric power plant, a 

vehicle garage, and an explosives storage area. Although the current concept has each of these 

functions split into a separate facility, the site as constructed may combine multiple functions 

into single buildings. 

Vehicle Processing Facility 

The VPF is proposed to be initially constructed of metal and concrete, covering up to 

approximately 1,486 square meters (16,000 square feet), and approximately 26 meters (84 feet) 

in height. The VPF would have a high bay, labs and shops to assemble, test, and repair the New 

Shepard RLV system. The New Shepard RLV components manufactured elsewhere would be 

transported to the VPF by commercial trucks. The RLV would be assembled and tested in the 

VPF without propellants prior to transporting to the launch complex. The VPF high bay would 

be equipped with overhead cranes, compressed air, gaseous nitrogen and helium services as well 

as standard aerospace electrical services. 

Ground support equipment would transport the New Shepard RLV from the VPF to the test pad, 

and back to the VPF from the landing pad. The transporter would be a low-speed hoist with a 

small (100 – 400 horsepower) engine. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-7

Administrative Support Center 

The administrative support center is proposed to be constructed of metal and concrete, and cover 

approximately 836 square meters (9,000 square feet). The administrative support center would 

house the control room and communications infrastructure for supporting flight operations, 

employee offices, conference rooms, lavatories, personnel break rooms, and other serviceassociated work areas. Blue Origin has no plans to provide accommodations for public viewing 

of launches. 

Astronaut Training Facility

The Astronaut Training Facility would consist of administrative offices, flight instruction 

classrooms, simulators and space flight participant medical screening areas, and test and 

evaluation areas for space flight participants. The facility is expected to be made of metal, wood 

or concrete and be less than 1,394 square meters (15,000 square feet). 

Power Generation Facility 

Blue Origin plans to seek extension of the public electric grid to the launch site and to operate a 

back-up power generation facility. In providing back-up power, Blue Origin would use 

commercially-available U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-approved mobile 

generators to supply both three-phase and single-phase alternating current (AC) power 

throughout the launch site. Uninterruptible power supply backup power systems would be 

installed at all critical operations and control point areas. 

Extension of the public electric grid to the launch site would involve extending a three-phase 

power line approximately 88 kilometers (55 miles) from the existing substation in Dell City, 

Texas to the proposed launch site. This is expected to include recommissioning and upgrading 

the existing substation, building a new three-phase overhead power line and upgrading existing 

single-phase overhead power lines to three-phase, as well as installing appropriate step 

transformers at the proposed launch site if required for power distribution. 

The Power Generation Facility is proposed to be a maximum of 465 square meters (5,000 square 

feet). 

Wastewater Treatment Plant 

A central wastewater treatment plant of 18,927 liters (5,000 gallons) per day capacity would be 

constructed west of Home Base Road and the power generation facility. The equipment building 

would cover an area less than 93 square meters (1,000 square feet). Effluents would be treated in 

accordance with the wastewater permit issued by the state of Texas and discharged to a 

percolation/evapotranspiration pond occupying approximately 0.4 hectares (one acre). Some 

remote facilities, such as the Guard House, could use a septic system. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-8

Vehicle Garage 

The vehicle garage would be approximately 929 square meters (10,000 square feet) in area. The 

vehicle garage would be used to store and maintain launch site support vehicles and equipment. 

Explosives Storage Area 

The explosives storage area (ESA) would be located to the west of the VPF and the other 

operations and administrative support buildings. Explosive storage buildings or approved mobile 

storage containers would provide safe and secure areas for ordnance normally incorporated into 

launch vehicle systems. The ESA would hold up to 11,793 kilograms (26,000 pounds) of Class 

1.3 propellant, occupying 1,101 square meters (11,856 square feet) situated at least 62.7 meters 

(206 feet) from inhabited buildings and transportation routes, and be constructed of concrete, 

metal and earthen materials. The explosives would be stored in DOT approved shipping 

containers. The ESA would conform to all applicable regulations for storage of such material. 

Launch Complex 

The launch complex area of the launch site would include the test pad and the propellant storage 

area. 

Test Pad 

The test launch pad (which may also serve as a landing pad during testing) would be located 

approximately 2.9 kilometers (1.8 miles) north of the VPF. The test pad design would provide 

equipment necessary for tanking and de-tanking of propellants and pressurants, static testing, and 

launching. The test pad would have electrical, pneumatic, fire detection/suppression, lightning 

protection, and data infrastructure services. The proposed test pad would be up to 3,000 square 

meters (32,292 square feet) in area. The immediate area surrounding the test pad may be cleared 

of vegetation to reduce the possibility of starting brush fires during the launch and landing 

activities. The area to be cleared would be approximately 0.9 hectares (2.2 acres). 

Propellant Storage Areas 

The propellant storage areas would be located outside of the calculated minimum safety 

explosive quantity distance established for the amount of propellants stored at the launch 

complex. The HTP oxidizer would be stored in an enclosure separated from the RP fuel 

enclosed storage area. HTP would be stored in three peroxide-certified aboveground storage 

tanks with a capacity of 37,855 liters (10,000 gallons) each, for a total capacity of 113,565 liters 

(30,000 gallons) or 157,397 kilograms-mass (347,000 pounds-mass), and a fourth 60,566-liter 

(16,000-gallon) tank for dilution of hydrogen peroxide. The HTP storage area would include a 

perimeter wall to contain fuel in the event of a spill or other leak, with a further sump trench 

downhill of the storage area. The perimeter wall around the HTP tanks would be able to hold 

approximately 56,782 liters (15,000 gallons), and the sump an additional 170,344 liters (45,000 

gallons). The HTP storage area would occupy approximately 706 square meters (7,600 square 

feet). Tank configuration for RP fuel is being proposed for storage in an above-ground storage 

tank with a total capacity of 37,854 liters (10,000 gallons) or 30,844 kilograms-mass (68,000 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-9

pounds-mass). The RP tank would utilize integral secondary containment with double wall 

construction, and would be equipped with over-fill protection devices and hydrocarbon leak 

detectors monitoring the space between the tanks walls. Trenches approximately 0.6 meters (2 

feet) deep would be dug, in which pipes would be laid for transporting propellant to the test pad. 

These trenches would be concrete lined, and have removable covers to allow vehicle traffic to 

drive over them. 

The propellant storage areas would also accommodate the storage of high pressure nitrogen and 

helium gases used to support the RLV propulsion system and preflight test operations. The 

propellant storage areas would have fire detection/suppression, alarm, announcing and area 

warning systems, lightning protection, and data infrastructure. 

Landing Pad 

A separate landing pad would be located 6.1 kilometers (3.8 miles) north of the VPF. The 

landing pad would be nominally used to recover the New Shepard RLV. The landing pad would 

be constructed of concrete and would be configured as a flat pad up to 3,000 square meters 

(32,292 square feet). The immediate area surrounding the landing pad may be cleared of 

vegetation to reduce the possibility of starting brush fires during the landing activities. The area 

to be cleared would be approximately 0.9 hectares (2.2 acres). 

The landing pad area would have fire detection/suppression, alarm, announcing and area warning 

systems connected to the Administrative Support Center. The landing pad would have power, 

lightning protection, and data infrastructure.

2.1.4.2 Process Operations and Flow Descriptions 

Blue Origin would ship the New Shepard propulsion module and CC RLVs to the West Texas 

Launch Site separately. The RLVs would originate at Blue Origin’s manufacturing and 

assembly facilities in the state of Washington and would travel via ground to West Texas. Blue 

Origin plans no more than ten total RLV shipments during the five-year period from 2006-2010. 

The RLVs may be fully assembled or partially disassembled during transportation. Some of 

these loads may be classified as oversized, but would be within the scope of loads routinely 

transported long distances for aerospace applications, such as aircraft fuselages and launch 

vehicle stages. 

Upon arrival at the launch site, Blue Origin would unpack the RLV, perform any reassembly 

required, and conduct an integrated test and checkout of subsystems. Once the RLV has 

successfully completed a series of flight simulation tests and the Flight Director has provided 

authorization, the flight-ready vehicle would then be transported to the launch complex, 

positioned on the test pad, and fueled by the launch site team. 

After final system checks are completed, the Flight Director would verify with the FAA Air 

Traffic Control (ATC) the time when the flight window is open and closed for the scheduled 

operation. Communications between the Flight Director and the ATC flight controller would be 

maintained from lift-off to recovery of the RLV at the landing pad. By maintaining constant 

voice communication with ATC during the flight operation, as well as voice communication with 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-10

members of the ground crew serving as spotters for unauthorized aircraft, the Flight Director 

would ensure the airspace is clear prior to launch. Specific procedures for airspace coordination 

will be prepared as part of the safety analysis for Blue Origin’s license and/or permit application. 

The nominal flight time for the New Shepard RLV is anticipated to be less than 10 minutes from 

lift-off to touchdown at the landing pad. 

2.1.4.3 Developmental Test Operations 

Blue Origin proposes to start limited RLV development testing in the last quarter of 2006. Initial 

testing would focus on the evaluation of rocket engine designs and performance with prototype 

vehicles as described in Section 2.1.1.2. The flight test program would consist of a number of 

test flights under varying flight conditions. These test flights are further described in 

Section 2.1.1.3 above. The flight test program would demonstrate that the New Shepard RLV 

could operate in the suborbital environment for which it was designed, that the vehicle functions 

as designed, and that the operational support it receives between flights is sufficient to maintain 

system integrity and reliability. 

2.1.4.4 Launch, Flight, Landing and Recovery Operations 

The New Shepard RLV launch, flight, and landing activities would require less than a 10 minute 

period to complete. Recovery operations would include safing the vehicle propulsion system 

following the landing event, extracting the crew, off-loading residual HTP oxidizer and RP fuel, 

and transporting the RLV back to the VPF for processing. 

Prior to each launch, Blue Origin may launch weather balloons filled with hydrogen or helium 

for assessing wind speed and other weather conditions. Nominally Blue Origin would launch 

one balloon per RLV launch, but in shifting meteorological conditions may launch up to 10 

balloons per RLV launch. Each balloon would carry a radiosonde, an expendable instrument 

package suspended from the balloon. Upon launch each balloon would measure approximately 2 

meters (6 feet) wide and expand in diameter as it rises in the atmosphere. As the radiosonde 

rises (at about 300 meters [1,000 feet] per minute), sensors on it measure atmospheric profiles 

such as pressure, temperature, and relative humidity. These sensors are linked to a battery 

powered radio transmitter that sends the sensor measurements to a ground receiver. Wind speed 

is measured by tracking the balloon with radar or optical trackers. 

The New Shepard RLV would rise to approximately 38,100 meters (125,000 feet) under thrust 

from its main engines. The duration of this propulsive flight phase would be approximately 110 

seconds. The RLV would then coast up to an apogee greater than 99,060 meters (325,000 feet). 

The RLV would then return to the landing pad under gravity free-fall conditions until the main 

engines are restarted to enable a powered landing. The RLV ground track would remain within 

the boundary of private land controlled by Blue Origin during the entire flight. As noted earlier 

in section 2.1.1.1, the propulsion module and CC may either return attached or land separately, 

depending on the mission scenario. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-11

2.1.4.5 Communications and Tracking 

Blue Origin plans to downlink navigation and critical system health data from the New Shepard 

RLV in real time, and display it on consoles for ground operators as the primary means of 

tracking the vehicle’s position. In the case of a separating CC, Blue Origin would downlink 

navigation data from both the propulsion module and CC simultaneously. The consoles would 

display the current position as well as the predicted IIP2. Blue Origin also plans to use longrange optical cameras during flight. Blue Origin is evaluating whether to also use radar to track 

the vehicle. 

During commercial operations, Blue Origin would also maintain constant voice communications 

with space flight participants in the CC. 

Proposed radio communications devices at the proposed launch site include: 

• S-band uplink and downlink radios to and from launch vehicles of 1 to 10 watts; 

• A Mode S transponder or other transponder for transmitting vehicle identification; 

• Commercial off-the-shelf private use ultra-high frequency radios for ground-to-ground 

communications (often referred to as base and ‘walkie-talkie’); 

• Commercial off-the-shelf radios receiving data from weather monitoring equipment; 

• Commercial off-the-shelf radio frequency remote control of various equipment, such as 

lifting cranes and fire protection equipment; 

• Commercial off-the-shelf radios for communications between personal computers and other 

mobile devices (often referred to as ‘WiFi’) and for video transmissions; 

• Radiosondes attached to weather balloons. 

Blue Origin anticipates that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has already granted 

licenses or exemptions for operation of some of the commercial, off-the-shelf equipment noted 

above, and Blue Origin plans to seek permits and licenses from the FCC for all other radios. 

 

2

 The point at which an object would impact if thrusting were stopped at a given time.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-12

2.1.4.6 Night Operations

Blue Origin would design the New Shepard vehicle and ground facilities with the capability to 

perform night launches, if authorized by the FAA permit or license. Even if the launch occurs 

during the day, it is likely that pre-launch activity would occur on the site in the pre-dawn hours, 

and vehicle maintenance would occur during the evening. 

Although the launch schedule has not yet been established, night launches would likely occur 

only infrequently and would comprise only a small fraction of the total number of New Shepard 

launches. Blue Origin does not anticipate conducting a night launch more frequently than once 

per month. 

2.1.4.7 Decommissioning Activities 

Decommissioning would occur if launch activities were approved and conducted at the site and 

Blue Origin eventually decided to stop conducting launches at the site. In this situation, the site 

would remain private property, and appropriate actions would be taken to ensure the proper 

disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous waste used or generated at the facility. 

2.1.5 Proposed Activities 

This EA addresses the overall impacts to the environment of the proposed operations anticipated 

for the five-year period under consideration. Therefore, the activities analyzed in the proposed 

action are those associated with the construction of the site and the launching and landing of the 

New Shepard and New Shepard prototype test vehicles at the proposed site, as follows: 

• Clearing and grading the land where construction activities are proposed to occur; 

• Constructing the following features as described in Section 2.1.1.4; 

• Cement batch plant

• Guard security post

• Perimeter fence

• Access road

• Parking area

• Water distribution and wastewater management

• Vehicle processing facility

• Administrative support center

• Space flight participant training facility

• Power generation facility

• Sewage treatment plant

• Vehicle garage

• Explosive storage area

• Test pad

• Propellant storage area

• Landing pad
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-13

• Transporting the vehicle, vehicle components, and propellants to the proposed site via road; 

• Assembling the various vehicle components; 

• Conducting ground-based tests and checkout activities; 

• Moving the launch vehicle to the test pad; 

• Loading the space flight participants, and/or other payload; 

• Fueling the launch vehicle; 

• Igniting the rocket motors; 

• Collecting any debris from the test pad; and 

• Landing, recovering and transporting the propulsion module and CC from the landing pad. 

The New Shepard vehicle and the New Shepard prototype test vehicles would launch and land 

vertically. The flight profile would be such that the vehicle would remain within the confines of 

the private property surrounding the launch facility. Prior to test and launch activities from the 

proposed facility, Blue Origin would be responsible for complying with all applicable FAA 

licensing or permitting requirements, including any required calculations regarding expected 

casualties. The FAA would consider safety concerns as part of the mission and safety analysis 

prior to making a decision about issuing a license or permit to Blue Origin. 

2.1.6 Permits, Licenses and Approvals 

In addition to necessary licenses or permits from the FAA, to support the activities described 

above, Blue Origin would obtain a variety of Federal, state and local permits, licenses and 

approvals. These include, among others: 

• FCC authorization related to radio and possibly radar at the proposed launch site. 

• State registrations relating to wastewater and/or solid waste streams; local permits for wells 

and for driveway connections to state highways; and if Blue Origin were to operate a fixed, 

permanent power generation facility, permits for associated emissions and above-ground fuel 

tanks. 

• State permits related to open burning of any planned fragments of solid rocket motors. 

2.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, the FAA would not issue a permit or license for Blue Origin to 

conduct launch operations in Culberson County, Texas. Under the no action alternative, Blue 

Origin would not conduct RLV testing or launch operations and, the goals set forth by the CSLA 

would not be advanced. As part of the no action alternative, the proposed site in Culberson 

County would remain private property. 

Under the no action alternative, Blue Origin would be forced to identify other private property 

options or to reconsider association with state-sponsored spaceport facilities. For Blue Origin, 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-14

these decisions could result in higher RLV development and operational costs, decreased 

operational capabilities, and delays to Blue Origin’s proposed development schedules. 

2.3 Launch Site Alternatives 

2.3.1 Alternative Locations Considered and Dismissed 

In 2004, Blue Origin began evaluating possible locations for its proposed commercial launch 

site. Candidate sites included two privately-owned parcels in Culberson County, Texas, the 

proposed state-sponsored Southwest Regional Spaceport in Upham, New Mexico, and the Pecos 

County Aerospace Development Corporation-sponsored Pecos County West Texas Spaceport at 

Fort Stockton, Texas. 

Blue Origin subsequently elected to conduct a more detailed analysis of the Culberson County 

sites. Blue Origin determined that launching from a remote, privately-owned, launch site would 

offer significant cost, schedule, and operational benefits for its proposed activities. These 

include: 

• The size of the Culberson County sites, their location within larger, privately-owned ranches, 

and Blue Origin’s ability to exclude third parties from the sites would provide a safety buffer 

surrounding Blue Origin’s area of activity. 

• The facilities could be designed specifically to meet Blue Origin’s technical and 

programmatic requirements, as opposed to satisfying the general needs of a variety of launch 

operators. 

• A private, exclusive-use site would eliminate the need to coordinate Blue Origin’s activities 

with other launch operators or the agencies that would operate the proposed spaceports. 

For these reasons, Blue Origin determined that the Culberson County alternatives would best 

permit the company to conduct innovative, flexible RLV operations consistent with its 

programmatic, schedule and cost requirements. 

2.3.2 Alternative Sites Considered in Culberson County 

Two alternative sites were considered in Culberson County (Site A and Site B) as candidate 

basing sites for the proposed facilities (Exhibit 2-2). Both sites are on privately-owned land 

parcels. Both sites are located on large tracts of ranchland in the general vicinity of the city of 

Van Horn. Both sites would involve substantially similar impact on the environment. Site A is 

located to the East of Highway 54 and has the following features: it is open flat desert in a valley 

between the slopes of Sierra Diablo and Delaware mountain ranges at an elevation of about 

1,132 meters (3,714 feet). Site B is located to the West of Highway 54 to the North and West of 

Site A and has the following features: it is open flat desert North and East of the slopes of the 

Sierra Diablo mountain range at an elevation of about 1,100 meters (3,610 feet). Site A has been 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-15

Exhibit 2-2. Alternative Launch Sites 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-16

identified as the preferred location for the proposed Blue Origin launch, landing, and recovery 

activities and as such is analyzed in detail in this EA. 

Site B was considered but dismissed for several reasons: 

• Site B is bisected by a natural gas pipeline and utility easement, which could impact the 

safety of landing operations. 

• Site B is closer to mountains, which made Site B less desirable for vehicle-recovery 

operations. 

2.3.3 Alternative Facility Configurations and Locations for Proposed Blue Origin 

Facilities in Culberson County, Texas 

Within Site A, alternative configurations for buildings and the test pad were considered. A 

triangular configuration was considered which would have the Home Base area, the Launch 

Complex and the Landing Pad as three points of a triangle roughly equidistant from each other. 

A straight line configuration also was considered with the Home Base at one end of the line, the 

Launch Complex in the middle, and the Landing Pad at the other end. Alternative locations for 

placing the straight line configuration also were considered. 

The triangular configuration was determined not to meet the purpose of and need for the 

proposed action, and therefore is not considered further in this EA. The triangular configuration 

would not allow for the development of a launch site for Blue Origin to pursue its objective of 

developing “safe, inexpensive and reliable human access to space” as stated in the purpose and 

need. Specifically, the triangular configuration was dismissed for the following reasons. 

• The triangular configuration involved launch-control personnel looking into the sun at certain 

times of day when trying to view launch operations, which could create unsafe conditions 

that make the alternative technically infeasible. 

• The triangular configuration would require transporting spacecraft up an elevated grade, 

making pre-launch operations difficult to execute, and therefore it was determined to be 

technically infeasible. 

The straight-line configuration has been identified as the preferred configuration for the proposed 

Blue Origin launch, landing, and recovery activities and as such is analyzed in detail in this EA. 

Under the preferred configuration the Home Base would be located in the southern portion of the 

site, the Launch Complex would be located in the middle and the Landing Pad would be located 

further to the north. The preferred location would have the straight line configuration 

approximately centered between the east and west boundaries of Site A. The preferred site 

would be located more towards the southern portion of Site A and would make use of existing 

roads in this area. Other locations for the straight-line alternative were considered and 

dismissed. 

Alternative locations that would orient the straight line configuration further to the West were 

dismissed for the following reasons. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

2-17

• This location would put the launch facilities closer to the publicly accessible Highway 54 and 

could result in additional hazards to public safety. 

• There is a ridge that runs much of the length of Site A, to the west of the preferred location 

that could seriously impact the safe transport of the launch vehicle by requiring the vehicle 

and transporter to traverse an area with a substantial grade. 

• If the launch activities were located on the ridge or to the west of the ridge (i.e., closer to 

Highway 54), they would be more visible to the public traveling along Highway 54 and could 

become a distraction to traveling motorists or cause members of the public to attempt to stop 

and observe the launch activities. 

• These potential safety concerns associated with this location would not allow for the 

development of a launch site for Blue Origin to pursue its objective of developing “safe, 

inexpensive and reliable human access to space” as stated in the purpose and need. 

Alternative locations that would orient the straight line configuration further to the East were 

dismissed for the following reasons. 

• The location of the Delaware Mountains to the east of Site A pose a vertical hazard to launch 

and landing operations. 

• This potential safety concern associated with this location would not allow for the 

development of a launch site for Blue Origin to pursue its objective of developing “safe, 

inexpensive and reliable human access to space” as stated in the purpose and need. 

Alternative locations that would orient the straight line configuration further to the North were 

dismissed for the following reasons. 

• The existing roads on the property are focused in the southern portion of Site A. Moving the 

straight line configuration to the north would result in the need to cause additional ground 

disturbance due to the construction of additional access roads. 

• Additional ground disturbance would increase the likelihood that cultural resources within 

Site A would be disturbed and could increase the amount of fugitive dust created by the 

construction activities. 

• These potential issues would increase the development costs of the needed infrastructure and 

would not allow for the development of a launch site for Blue Origin to pursue its objective 

of developing “safe, inexpensive and reliable human access to space” as stated in the purpose 

and need. 

 
 

This page intentionally left blank.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-1

3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 

This section describes the existing environmental and socioeconomic characteristics of the area 

that could be affected by the proposed action and alternatives described in Section 2 of this EA. 

The information provided serves as a baseline from which to identify and evaluate environmental 

changes resulting from the proposed action and alternatives. To provide this baseline the 

affected environment is briefly described and those resource areas with a potential for concern 

are described in greater detail. 

The affected environment is discussed in terms of the following resource areas: air resources, 

ecological resources, cultural/Native American resources, hazardous materials/waste 

management, land use, visual and aesthetic resources, noise, geology and soils, socioeconomics, 

traffic and transportation, water resources, health and safety, airspace, and environmental justice, 

DOT Section 4(f) lands and farmland are addressed as part of land use; floodplains are addressed 

as part of geology and soils; wetlands, and wild and scenic rivers are addressed as part of water 

resources; and natural resources and energy supply are addressed as part of socioeconomics. 

3.1 Air Resources 

3.1.1 Definition of Resource 

The Earth’s atmosphere consists of four main layers (i.e., troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere, 

and ionosphere) that are separated by narrow transition zones. Each layer is characterized by 

altitude, temperature, structure, density, composition, and degree of ionization (i.e., the positive 

or negative electric charge associated with each layer). For the purpose of this EA, “lower 

atmosphere” refers to the troposphere, which extends from ocean level to an altitude of 

approximately 10 kilometers (32,800 feet). “Upper atmosphere” refers to the stratosphere, which 

extends from 10 kilometers (32,800 feet) to approximately 50 kilometers (164,000 feet), and 

higher altitudes. 

Ambient air quality in the lower atmosphere is usually measured in terms of the concentration of 

various air pollutants in the atmosphere. The impact of exposure to ambient contaminants is a 

function of the pollutant involved, the duration of the exposure, and the concentrations reached 

during the exposure. The significance of a pollutant concentration is determined by comparing 

the concentration with appropriate Federal or State ambient air quality standards. These 

standards represent the allowable pollutant concentrations at which public health and welfare are 

protected and include a reasonable margin of safety. 

The stratospheric ozone (O3) layer protects the earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation. O3 is 

continually created and destroyed by naturally occurring photochemical processes and its 

concentration fluctuates seasonally (25 percent) and annually (1-2 percent). O3 is made up of 

three oxygen atoms, and is generated by the action of sunlight to combine an oxygen molecule 

with an atom of oxygen. Atomic oxygen is produced by photolysis, or the use of radiant energy 

to produce chemical changes, of molecules of oxygen, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), or O3. O3 can be 

depleted by compounds that contain various elements, most notably chlorine, fluorine, hydrogen, 

and nitrogen. Aluminum oxide (particulates) and soot may also provide a reaction surface for 

the destruction of O3. NO2 is also important; it functions as a major catalyst for O3 destruction in 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-2

the stratosphere. (FAA 2001) As the O3 layer is depleted, more ultraviolet radiation can 

penetrate, resulting in potential health and environmental harm, including higher rates of certain 

skin cancers and cataracts, suppression of the immune system, damage to crops and aquatic 

organisms, and increased formation of ground-level O3. 

3.1.2 Regulatory Setting 

The primary Federal legislation that addresses air quality is the Clean Air Act (CAA). Under the 

authority of the CAA and its amendments, the U.S. EPA established a set of National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), NO2, O3, 

Particulate Matter (PM) with diameter 10 microns or less (PM10) and 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5), 

sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb). The NAAQS established “primary” standards to protect 

public health and “secondary” standards designed to protect the public welfare by addressing the 

effects of air pollution on vegetation, soil, materials, visibility, and other aspects of the general 

welfare. In addition to the NAAQS, the CAA also authorizes EPA to regulate emissions of 

hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), also known as toxic air pollutants or air toxics. HAPs are 

pollutants that cause or may cause cancer or other serious health effects, such as reproductive 

effects or birth defects, or adverse environmental and ecological effects. 

3.1.2.1 Criteria Pollutants 

As discussed previously, EPA has NAAQS for seven criteria air pollutants: SO2, CO, NO2, O3

(including volatile organic compounds [VOCs], and nitrogen oxides [NOX] as precursors), PM10, 

PM2.5, and Pb. For both primary and secondary standards, threshold levels were determined 

based on years of research on the health effects of various concentrations of pollutants on 

biological organisms, as well as other potential impacts on the environment. The State of Texas 

implements and enforces the NAAQS. 

To further define local and regional air quality, the EPA divided the country into areas that 

achieve the NAAQS, called attainment areas, and those that do not achieve the NAAQS, called 

non-attainment areas. The non-attainment and attainment classifications are generally based on 

air quality monitoring data collected at certain sites in the state. The criteria for non-attainment 

designation vary by pollutant. For example, an area is in nonattainment for O3 if its NAAQS has 

been exceeded more than three discontinuous times in three years at a single monitoring station, 

whereas an area is in non-attainment for CO if its NAAQS has been exceeded more than once 

per year. Areas where insufficient data are available to make an attainment status designation 

are listed as unclassifiable. Unclassifiable areas are treated as attainment areas for regulatory 

purposes. Areas that were previously designated nonattainment and subsequently redesignated 

to attainment due to meeting the NAAQS are classified as maintenance areas. 

3.1.2.2 Toxic Air Pollutants 

The 1990 CAA amendments require EPA to establish technology-based standards for HAPs 

called Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT). These MACT standards are sourcecategory specific and must be achieved by sources with the potential to emit 9.08 metric tons (10 

tons) per year of any single HAP, or more than 22.7 metric tons (25 tons) per year of any 

combination of HAPs. The 1990 CAA amendments also require EPA to establish “residual risk” 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-3

standards after the MACT standards have been implemented. These standards are designed to 

ensure that the public health is protected from exposure to HAPs with an “ample margin of 

safety” and that any adverse environmental effects are prevented. Like MACT standards, the 

residual risk standards are source-category specific; however, unlike the MACT standards, they 

are based on risks as opposed to technology. There are not currently any residual risk standards 

that would apply to the proposed action. 

3.1.2.3 Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

For locations that are in an attainment area for criteria air pollutants, Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) regulations limit pollutant emissions from new or modified sources and 

establish allowable increments of pollutant concentrations. Three PSD classifications are 

specified, with the criteria established, in the CAA. Class I areas are those of special national 

concern where any appreciable deterioration in air quality is considered significant. 

Consequently, the most restrictive increments apply in Class I areas. Class I areas include all 

national parks, wilderness areas, and memorial parks that exceed certain sizes. Less restrictive 

increments apply in areas designated as Class II or Class III. Class II areas are all PSD areas that 

are designated as attainment or unclassifiable with respect to the NAAQS and are not classified 

in the CAA as Class I areas. Individual states have the authority to redesignate Class II areas to 

Class III areas to allow for higher levels of industrial development and emissions growth. There 

are as yet no designated Class III areas. 

PSD requirements apply to major stationary sources. The CAA specifies 26 categories of 

stationary sources which are considered major sources if they emit or have potential to emit 90.7 

metric tons (100 tons) per year or more of any pollutant subject to CAA regulation. Any other 

stationary source which emits or has the potential to emit 226.8 metric tons (250 tons) per year or 

more of any air pollutant subject to regulation under CAA is considered a major source and is 

subject to PSD requirements. 

3.1.2.4 Regional Haze 

Section 169 of the CAA sets forth a national goal for visibility, defined as the “prevention of any 

future, and the remedying of any existing, impairment of visibility in Class I areas...from 

manmade air pollution.” Regional haze is visibility impairment caused by cumulative air 

pollution sources over a wide geographic area. Under the regional haze rule (64 FR 35714, dated 

July 1, 1999), States are required to develop State Implementation Plans to address visibility at 

designated mandatory Class I areas, including designated national parks, wilderness areas, and 

wildlife refuges. A visibility analysis is required for each Class I area located within 100 

kilometers (62 miles) of any new or modified major stationary sources whose emissions exceed 

PSD modeling thresholds. 

3.1.2.5 Climate Change 

The possibility of global climate change due to the increased introduction of “greenhouse gases” 

[e.g., carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide] into 

the atmosphere through human activity is a widely publicized, global issue with potential major 

long-term implications to global climate and ecosystems. No specific regulatory standards for 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-4

climate change exist. Various international treaties and agreements have been developed but the 

U.S. is not party to such agreements. 

3.1.3 Region of Influence 

The region of influence for air quality encompasses an area surrounding a candidate site that is 

potentially affected by air pollutant emissions caused by the alternatives. The air quality impact 

area normally evaluated is the area in which concentrations of criteria pollutants would increase 

more than a significant amount in a Class II area. Generally, this covers a few kilometers 

downwind from the source. Further, for sources within 100 kilometers (62 miles) of a Class I 

area, the air quality impact area evaluated would include the Class I area if the increase in 

concentration were greater than one microgram per cubic meter (24-hour average). The area of 

the region of influence depends on emission source characteristics, pollutant types, emission 

rates, and meteorological and topographical conditions. 

The proposed launch site is located in a Class II area. The nearest Class I areas to the proposed 

launch site are the Guadalupe Mountains National Park (Texas) and Carlsbad Caverns National 

Park (New Mexico), located approximately 35 and 60 kilometers (22 and 37 miles), respectively, 

north of the proposed launch site. 

Two region of influence boundaries were established for this project. For NAAQS and air 

quality increment analyses, impacts were evaluated at the site boundary, plus any additional area 

in which contributions to pollutant concentrations are expected to exceed significance levels. 

For visibility and related impacts in Class I areas, the region of influence is set at 100 kilometers 

(62 miles). 

3.1.4 Existing Conditions 

3.1.4.1 Climate and Meteorology 

 The proposed Blue Origin launch site would be located in Culberson County, Texas 

approximately 40 kilometers (25 miles) north of Van Horn. Culberson County is located in the 

Trans-Pecos region of West Texas. The general climate of the Trans-Pecos region is 

characterized as arid to semi-arid. The region is cool and dry during the winter and hot and dry 

during the summer. The average annual precipitation in the region is about 33 centimeters 

(13 inches), with most of the rainfall coming in the form of thundershowers between the months 

of June and October. (TWDB 2001) Annual precipitation generally decreases from east to west 

and increases with elevation. The average annual temperature in the region is approximately 

18o

C (65oF). Average high temperatures range from about 25 to 27oC (77 to 80oF). Average low 

temperatures are between 7 and 12o

C (45 and 54oF). (TWDB 2001) The prevailing winds are 

from the southeast, but significant terrain-induced winds exist across the mountainous areas. 

(NWS 2005a) 

In Van Horn, the average winter temperature is approximately 7°C (44°F) with an average daily 

minimum temperature of approximately -0.6°C (31°F). (NWS 2005b) The lowest temperature 

on record was -22°C (-7°F). In summer, the average temperature in Van Horn is approximately 

26°C (79°F). Average daily maximum temperature in summer is approximately 34°C (94°F). 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-5

The highest temperature on record was 44°C (112° F). The average annual precipitation in Van 

Horn is about 28 centimeters (11.2 inches) and the average annual snowfall is about 

6 centimeters (2.4 inches). (NWS 2005b) The average annual wind speed is 14 kilometers per 

hour (8.9 miles per hour). The highest average wind speed, around 18 kilometers per hour 

(11 miles per hour), occurs in March and April. (City Data, undated) 

3.1.4.2 Occurrence of Hazardous Weather Conditions 

During the spring and summer months, thunderstorms accompanied by heavy rainfall and hail 

are occasionally observed. Local flooding often occurs during these storms, but is of short 

duration (NWS 2005a). Tornadoes and winds with peak gusts as high as 151 kilometers per hour 

(94 miles per hour) have been observed in the Van Horn area. (NCDC 2005) 

Blowing dust may occur in the region due to the combination of strong winds, sparse vegetation 

and the arid to semi-arid climate. High winds associated with thunderstorms are frequently a 

source of localized blowing dust. The sky is occasionally obscured by dust, but in most storms 

visibilities range from 2 to 5 kilometers (1 to 3 miles) (NWS 2005a). Dust storms covering an 

extensive area are rare, and those that reduce visibility to less than 2 kilometers (1 mile) occur 

only with the strongest pressure gradients such as those associated with intense extratropical 

cyclones which occasionally form in the region during winter and early spring. (Heidorn 2002) 

An average of five dust storms per year is observed in the region. (NWS 2005c) 

3.1.4.3 Site Air Quality 

The air quality in Culberson County can be generally considered as unimpaired. Ranching, 

farming, vehicular traffic, and three small industrial facilities are the only human activities 

within Culberson County that would affect background air quality. The Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality (TCEQ) currently does not have any air quality monitoring stations in the 

county. (TCEQ 2005) Because there are no air monitoring stations in Culberson County, the 

county is deemed unclassifiable/attainment for all NAAQS. (40 CFR 81.344) 

Exhibit 3-1 compares monitored air concentrations around the region with NAAQS. Because 

there are no air monitoring stations in Culberson County, data from the air monitoring station 

nearest to the launch site for each criteria pollutant are provided. For CO and PM10, the nearest 

monitoring stations are located in the El Paso urban area, a nonattainment area for CO and PM10. 

Data from these monitoring stations would not be representative of conditions in the project 

vicinity. Therefore, data from monitoring stations located in Webb County, Texas and Lea 

County, New Mexico are provided for CO and PM10, respectively. As noted previously, 

Culberson County is considered to be unclassifiable/attainment for all of the NAAQS. 

The only EPA-listed HAP of interest for this document is hydrogen chloride (HCl). HCl would 

be released from solid rocket motors during an emergency separation. Exhibit 3-2 provides 

estimated baseline emissions for criteria pollutants and HCl in Culberson County. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-6

Exhibit 3-1. Comparison of Air Concentrations in Nearby Counties with NAAQS 

Pollutant Averaging 

Time NAAQS 2004 2003 2002 

1-hr 35 6.2a 7.5 a 7.2 a

CO (ppm) 

8-hr 9 3.5 a 3.5 a 4.3 a

NO2 (ppm) Annual 0.053 0.005 b 0.006 b 0.007 b

1-hr 0.12 0.076 b 0.073 b 0.087 b

Ozone (ppm) 8-hr 0.08 0.065 0.065 b 0.076 b

24-hr 0.14 0.004 b 0.004 b 0.009 b

SO2 (ppm) Annual 0.030 0.001 b 0.001 b 0.001 b

24-hr 65 8 c 12 c 10 c

PM2.5 (μg/m3) Annual 15.0 3.7 c 4.1 c 3.9 c

24-hr 150 48 c 88 c 54 c

PM10 (μg/m3) Annual 50 15 d 26 d 17 d

Pb (μg/m3) Quarter 1.5 0.02 e 0.01 e 0.01 e

Source: EPA 2005 a

 Webb County, Texas (nearest representative monitoring station to the proposed launch site for CO) b

 Eddy County, New Mexico (nearest monitoring station to the proposed launch site for NO2, O3, and SO2) c

 Jeff Davis County, Texas (nearest monitoring station to the proposed launch site for PM2.5) d

 Lea County, New Mexico (nearest monitoring station to the proposed launch site for PM10) e

 Webb County, Texas (nearest monitoring station to the launch site for Pb)

Exhibit 3-2. Estimated Annual Emissions for Culberson County, Texas 

Pollutant Mobile 

(tons per year) 

Industrial 

(tons per year)

Area 

(tons per year)

Total 

(tons per year)

CO 5,063 48.14 9 5,120.14 

NO2 1,682 589.40 4 2,275.4 

SO2 55 0.48 2 57.48 

PM2.5 120 0 98 218 

PM10 438 0 552 990 

VOC 567 4.67 145 716.67 

HCl --- --- 0.03 0.03 

Source: EPA 2005 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-7

There are two Class I areas within 100 kilometers (62 miles) of the proposed launch site; the 

Guadalupe Mountains National Park and Carlsbad Caverns National Park. A variety of air 

pollution sources affect air quality and contribute to visibility degradation in these parks, 

including power generating plants, natural gas compressor stations, local gas well flaring, and 

mobile and area sources in El Paso, Hudspeth, Culberson, Loving, and Reeves counties in Texas, 

and Otero, Lee, and Eddy counties in New Mexico, in addition to other areas of the Southwest. 

Limited visibility measurements were made in Carlsbad Caverns National Park in the 1970s and 

1980s, but measurements at Guadalupe Mountains National Park are now used to characterize 

visibility in both parks. An analysis of 1990-1999 data indicates that visibility in the area is 

improving slightly on the clearest days, but degrading significantly on the haziest days. Clearest 

days are associated with high pressure winds from the northwest; planned oil and gas 

development on the Otero Mesa could contribute to visibility degradation in the park on those 

clearest days. (NPS 2005) 

3.2 Ecological Resources 

3.2.1 Definition of Resource 

Ecological resources include vegetation, wildlife, threatened and endangered species, and 

environmentally sensitive habitats. In this document, “special-status” species are those that are 

federally-listed as endangered or threatened, proposed for listing as endangered or threatened, 

candidates for federal listing; and species that are state-listed as endangered or threatened. 

3.2.2 Regulatory Setting 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 

(TPWD) are the agencies with responsibility and/or authority for special-status species. 

Species that are federally listed as threatened or endangered are protected under the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended. Under this legislation, a species is considered endangered if it 

is “...in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range...,” and threatened 

if it is “likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a 

significant portion of its range.” This legislation designates candidate species as species for 

which “...the Service has enough substantial information on biological vulnerability and threat(s) 

to support proposals to list them as endangered or threatened.” 

Texas laws and regulations pertaining to endangered or threatened animal species are contained 

in Chapters 67 and 68 of the TPWD Code and Sections 65.171 - 65.184 of Title 31 of the Texas 

Administrative Code (TAC). Endangered or threatened plant species are protected under 

regulations contained in Chapter 88 of the TPWD Code and Sections 69.01 - 69.14 of the TAC. 

Endangered species are those that the Executive Director of the TPWD has named as being 

"threatened with statewide extinction," and threatened species are those that the TPWD has 

determined are likely to become endangered in the future. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-8

3.2.3 Region of Influence 

The region of influence for ecological resources includes the proposed launch site and nearby off 

site plants, animals, and habitats that could be affected by construction and operations. 

3.2.4 Existing Conditions 

Ecological resources at the proposed launch site are described below, and are based largely on 

biological surveys conducted at the proposed launch site in January and April 2005. Details 

regarding the biological surveys and a more detailed description of ecological resources at the 

proposed launch site are provided in Appendix C. 

3.2.4.1 Vegetation 

The 7,527-hectare (18,600-acre) launch site is located within the Chihuahuan Desert, which is 

the largest of the four North American deserts. Most of the Chihuahuan Desert is in Mexico, but 

northward fingers extend along the Rio Grande and Pecos rivers into portions of Texas and New 

Mexico. The general vegetation community known as Chihuahuan Desert Scrub encompasses 

the proposed launch site. Overgrazing, climate change, and fire suppression have extended this 

vegetation community type northward over the last 100 to 250 years into areas previously 

characterized as grasslands. (Dick-Peddie 1993) Creosote (Larrea tridentata) and tarbush 

(Flourensia cernua) are co- dominant indicator species of Chihuahuan Desert Scrub. The 

proposed launch site is situated within a basin formed by the Sierra Diablo Mountains on the 

west and the Delaware Mountains on the east. Gently sloping alluvial fans dominate the eastern 

portion of the site, draining to the west. A northwest-to-southeast trending gypsum ridge ranging 

from approximately two to eight meters (5 to 25 feet) in height is located in the west-central 

portion of the site and overlooks a large similarly aligned depression to the west. 

Five subsets of Chihuahuan Desert Scrub vegetation community occur within the proposed 

launch site. 

• Creosote bush 5,609 hectares (13,860 acres) 

• Sacaton 1,257 hectares (3,105 acres) 

• Grama grass 59 hectares (145 acres) 

• Gypsophilic 619 hectares(1,529 acres) 

• Arroyo Riparian less than 0.8 hectares (less than 2 acres) 

Brief descriptions of each community type are provided below. 

The creosote bush community comprises the majority of vegetation within the proposed launch 

site (Exhibit 3-3), and encompasses nearly three quarters of the site. Topographically the 

creosote bush community coincides with gently sloped alluvial fans and level expanses. The 

community is dominated by creosote, and the presence of soaptree yucca (Yucca elata) and fluff 

grass (Erioneuron pulchellum) with minimal tarbush occurrence indicates recent (within the past 

150 years) grassland succession. (Dick-Peddie 1993) 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-9

Exhibit 3-3. Vegetation Communities 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-10

The sacaton community occurs in poorly drained saline, calcareous clay loam soils that are 

prevalent along the western-southwestern edge of the site, and in one relatively large area in the 

central portion of the site. These flat areas are interspersed with swales and are characterized by 

alkali sacaton (Sporobolus airoides) and four-winged saltbush (Atriplex canescens) intermixed 

with patches of burro grass (Scleropogon brevifolius), fluff grass, tobosa (Hilaria mutica), and 

threeawn (Aristida sp.). 

The grama grass community is dominated by black grama (Bouteloua eripoda). Other species 

include alkali sacaton, tobosa, burro grass, creosote, honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa), and 

tarbush. 

The linear gypsum ridge in the west-central portion of the site supports the Gypsophilic 

community type. The ridge surface layer is composed of rocky consolidated limestone with 

presumably high levels of calcium carbonate and calcium sulfate in surface soils. The 

Gypsophilic community is the least diverse in the proposed launch site. Hairy coldenia (Tiquilia 

hispidissima), alkali sacaton, althorn (Koeberlinia spinosa), soaptree yucca, evening primrose 

(Oenothera missouriensis), bush muhly (Muhlenbergia porteri), and stickleaf (Mentzilia 

albicaulis) are the primary plant species. 

Arroyo riparian vegetation within the proposed launch site is uncommon and occurs only near 

man-made arroyos (dry gullies) and impoundments. There are no naturally occurring surface 

waters within the site, nor any true riparian vegetation communities. Thus, the arroyo vegetation 

communities at the site have been termed “pseudo-riparian.” These communities encompass 

small circular areas around former livestock ponds and tanks or thin linear swales along 

ephemeral drainages. Although water is no longer pumped to these ponds and tanks, they 

apparently hold water after rains and tend to be more lushly vegetated than surrounding areas. 

This community type is dominated by large honey mesquite typically exceeding 5 meters (15 

feet) in height and 20 centimeters (8 inches) diameter at breast height, sumac (Rhus 

microphyllum), desert willow (Chilopsis linearis) and thick, tall, bunch stands of alkali sacaton. 

3.2.4.2 Wildlife 

The Trans-Pecos region of the Chihuahuan Desert in West Texas is home to numerous species of 

invertebrates, reptiles, amphibians, mammals, and migrant and local birds. Habitats at the site 

are typical of those in the region, and thus, wildlife species present are typical of those in the 

surrounding region. Common birds at the site include the turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), 

common raven (Corvus corax), greater roadrunner (Geococcyx californianus), Northern 

mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), and scaled quail (Callipepla squamata). Mammals at the site 

include the coyote (Canis latrans), badger (Taxidea taxus), pronghorn “antelope” (Antilocapra 

americana), chipmunk (Eutamias sp.), black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), and desert 

cottontail (Sylvilagus aududoni). Reptiles at the site include the little striped whiptail lizard 

(Cnemidophorus inornatus), bull snake (Pituophis melanoleuca sayi), and prairie rattlesnake 

(Crotalus viridis viridis). Fish are not present due to the absence of surface water at the site. 

Appendix C contains a detailed description of species recorded at the site during biological 

surveys. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-11

A small cave located along the eastern side of the limestone ridge in the west-central portion of 

the surveyed site contained a small colony of bats during the April 2005 survey. The bats 

appeared to be cave myotis (Myotis velifer), a common bat species in the Trans-Pecos region of 

Texas. A positive identification was not completed. 

Two black-tailed prairie dog colonies occur in the vicinity of the launch site. The larger of the 

two colonies is located slightly outside the northwest boundary of the launch site. The colony 

covers approximately 0.08 to 0.1 square kilometers (20 to 25 acres), and the eastern edge of the 

colony is approximately 183 meters (600 feet) west of the launch site’s western boundary. The 

other prairie dog colony is located in the southeastern portion of the launch site within the 

sacaton vegetation community, and covers approximately 0.03 to 0.04 square kilometers (8 to 10 

acres). 

3.2.4.3 Special-Status Species 

This section addresses plant and animal special status species that potentially occur around the 

proposed launch site. 

No federally- or state-listed special-status species were noted in the proposed launch site during 

the January and April 2005 field surveys. Exhibit 3-4 lists the special-status plant and animal 

species found (or formerly found) in Culberson County, and describes the habitat associated with 

each species. The table includes all special-status species for Culberson County based on 

records from USFWS (2005a) and TPWD (2005a). The USFWS (2005a) list for Culberson 

County consisted of five special-status species: Guadalupe fescue, gypsum wild buckwheat, 

Mexican spotted owl, Southwestern willow flycatcher, and yellow-billed cuckoo. The TPWD 

(2005a) list for Culberson County included all species in Table 3-3 except gypsum wild 

buckwheat. 

The proposed launch site does not contain suitable habitat for the following 11 species listed in 

Exhibit 3-4: common black hawk, gray hawk, Mexican spotted owl, Southwestern willow 

flycatcher, yellow-billed cuckoo, zone-tailed hawk, Pecos pupfish, Chihuahuan mud turtle, 

mountain short-horned lizard, Guadalupe Mountains fescue, and gypsum wild buckwheat. Two 

species in Exhibit 3-4 (the black-footed ferret and gray wolf) have been extirpated from Texas 

(TPWD 2005a), and thus, are not present in the vicinity. 

The black bear is occasionally found in desert lowlands in west Texas, but prefers mountainous 

forests (Schmidly 2004), and bears have not been observed by Blue Origin personnel or 

contractors in the vicinity of the proposed launch site. The American peregrine falcon and Arctic 

peregrine falcon might pass through the vicinity of the proposed launch site during migration, 

but would not nest there. The Arctic peregrine falcon nests only in Arctic regions and the 

American peregrine falcon usually nests in close proximity to water, so no suitable nest habitat 

occurs at the site. The remaining four species that could potentially occur in vicinity of the 

proposed launch site are discussed in detail below. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-12

Exhibit 3-4. Special Status Species in Culberson County, Texas 

Species Federal 

Statusa

State 

Statusa Habitat Requirements and Notes 

Birds

American peregrine 

falcon (Falco 

peregrinus anatum) 

- E Nests in on high cliffs, usually in close proximity to water; 

not known to nest in very arid desert regions; potential 

migrant in Culberson Countyb,c,d

Arctic peregrine falcon 

(Falco peregrinus 

tundrius) 

- T Nests in artic arctic regions, potential migrant in 

Culberson Countyb,c

Common black-hawk 

(Buteogallus 

anthracinus) 

- T Cottonwood-lined rivers and streams; willow thickets on 

the lower Rio Grande floodplainb,c

Gray hawk 

(Asturina nitida) 

- T Riparian forests, open woodlands, pastures with scattered 

trees and hedgerows; in Texas, typically restricted to Rio 

Grand valleyb,c

Mexican spotted owl 

(Strix occidentalis 

lucida) 

T T Nests in mixed conifer forests with high canopy closure, 

high stand density, a multi-layered canopy, uneven-aged 

stands, numerous snags, and downed woody matterb,c

Northern aplamado 

falcon (Falco 

femoralis 

septentrionalis) 

E E Open country, especially savannah and open woodland, 

and sometimes in barren areas, grassy plains and valleys 

with scattered mesquite, yucca, and cactusb,c 

Southwestern willow 

flycatcher (Empidonax 

traillii extimus) 

E E Riparian thickets, especially willow and cottonwood; also 

known to use dense thickets dominated by tamarix and 

mesquite in close proximity to surface waterb, c

Yellow-billed cuckoo 

(Coccyzus 

americanus) 

C - Lowland deciduous woodlands of cottonwood and willow 

in riparian and mesic areas; nests in dense understory 

foliageb,c

Zone-tailed hawk 

(Buteo albonotatus) 

- T Open deciduous or pine-oak woodlands in mountainous 

areas near water, wooded canyons, tree-lined rivers along 

middle slopes of desert mountainsb,c

Fish 

Pecos pupfish 

(Cyprinodon 

pecosensis) 

- T Springs, sinkholes, and pools of streams in Pecos River 

drainageb

Mammals

Black bear 

(Ursus americanus) 

- T Mostly mountainous forested areas; occasionally desert 

lowlandsb,e

Black-footed ferret 

(Mustela nigripes) 

E E Considered extirpated in Texas, the last Texas records 

were from Dallam (1953) and Bailey (1963) counties in 

the panhandle; this species is associated with large prairie 

dog coloniesb,e,f
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-13

Species Federal 

Statusa

State 

Statusa Habitat Requirements and Notes 

Gray wolf 

(Canis lupus) 

E E Formerly known throughout the western two-thirds of the 

state in forests, brush lands; extirpatedb,e 

Reptiles

Chihuahuan Desert 

lyre snake 

(Trimorphodon 

vilkinsonii) 

- T Crevices in predominantly limestone-surfaced desert, 

especially in areas with jumbled boulders and rock 

fissuresb

Chihuahuan mud turtle 

(Kinosternon hirtipes 

murrayi) 

- T A semi-aquatic species that prefers bodies of fresh water 

with abundant aquatic vegetation; preferred habitats 

absent from proposed launch siteb

Mountain short-horned 

lizard (Phrynosoma 

hernandesi) 

- T Forested areas and semiarid plains at high elevations in 

open, shrubby, or wooded areas with sparse vegetation at 

ground levelb,g

Texas horned lizard 

(Phrynosoma 

cornutum) 

- T Open, arid and semi-arid regions with sparse vegetation; 

grass, cactus, scattered brush or scrubby treesb

Trans-Pecos blackheaded snake 

(Tantilla cucullata) 

- T Mesquite-creosote and pinon-juniper-oakb

Plants

Guadalupe Mountains 

fescue (Festuca 

ligulata) 

C - Gravelly and sandy loams in woodlands and grasslands on 

mesic slopes and in creek bottoms above 1,800 meters 

(6,000 feet) in the Guadalupe and Chisos Mountains; 

habitat types not found within the proposed launch siteb

Gypsum wild 

buckwheat 

(Eriogonum 

gypsophilum) 

T - Restricted to almost pure gypsum that is sparsely 

vegetated with other gypsophilous plantsb,h

a

 E = Endangered, T = Threatened, C = Candidate, - = Not listed 

b

 TPWD, 2005a 

c

 Rappole and Blacklock, 1994 

d

 TPWD, 2005c 

e

 Schmidly, 2004 

f

 USFWS, 1988 

g

 BISON, 2005c 

h

 NMRTPC, 2005 

Northern aplomado falcon (Falco femoralis septentrionalis) 

The Northern aplomado falcon is federally and state listed as endangered. This species was once 

found throughout the southwestern United States, but had nearly disappeared by 1930. Causes 

for their decline are uncertain, but habitat conversion and degradation, and stream channelization 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-14

that reduced riparian foraging habitat are probably major factors. (TPWD 2005b) After no 

confirmed sightings since the 1950s, a nesting attempt was recorded in Luna County, New 

Mexico in 2001. In 2002, this pair successfully fledged three chicks. Since then this site has not 

supported a successful breeding pair. (BISON 2005a) 

In 1983, recovery efforts were initiated with captive nestling falcons from Mexico and 

transferred to the Peregrine Fund’s facility in Boise, Idaho. Reintroduction efforts began in 1985 

in southern Texas. These releases have resulted in the establishment of at least 39 pairs in south 

Texas and adjacent Mexico, and these birds have successfully fledged more than 179 young. 

(USFWS 2005b) In 2002, falcons were released at four sites on private ranches in west Texas 

under the Safe Harbor Agreement with the Peregrine Fund. These sites included a location 

approximately 80 kilometers (50 miles) south of the proposed launch facility. (USFWS 2005b) 

The Northern aplomado falcon requires open grassland terrain with scattered trees or yuccas, an 

abundant prey base, and suitable nesting platforms. In the Mexican State of Chihuahua, 

Northern aplomado falcon territories were located in desert grassland/savanna where blue grama 

and tobosa grass were the most abundant grasses at nesting sites. (BISON 2005a) Northern 

aplomado falcons do not build their own nests, but instead appropriate abandoned stick nests of 

other bird species, particularly ravens and other raptor species. Most Northern aplomado falcon 

nests are in multi-branched soaptree yuccas and mesquite. Falcons often hunt cooperatively 

feeding on small to medium sized birds, insects, rodents, bats and reptiles. As with most raptors, 

the Northern aplomado falcon requires a large home range. The home range of post-released 

Northern aplomado falcons in Texas varied from 36 to 280 square kilometers (14 to 108 square 

miles). (BISON 2005a) 

There is no record of nesting Northern aplomado falcons within Culberson County (USFWS 

2005a), and none were observed during biological surveys of the proposed launch site in April 

2005, which is the typical time period for nesting of this species in Texas. (TWPD 2005b) The 

proposed launch site is located within the historic range of Northern aplomado falcon and given 

the close proximity of reintroduction efforts, the species might occasionally forage at the 

proposed launch site. However, this species is typically associated with large Chihuahuan 

grassland expanses, and grasslands in the proposed launch site are not extensive. Only about 58 

hectares (144 acres) of the 7,527 hectares (18,600 acres) proposed launch site are classified as 

grassland, and as shown in Exhibit 3-3, the 58 hectares (144 acres) of grama grass habitat are not 

contiguous, and instead are divided into three sub-areas within the creosote bush habitat type. In 

summary, the site does not represent prime habitat for the Northern aplomado falcon, but the 

possibility of occasional foraging cannot be ruled out. 

Chihuahuan desert lyre snake (Trimorphodon vilkinsonii) 

State listed as threatened, this species is a secretive crevice-dwelling reptile found in the 

predominantly limestone-surfaced desert northwest of the Rio Grande River from Big Bend to 

the Franklin Mountains. A burrowing (fossorial) species, it inhabits rocky areas with jumbled 

boulders, and rock faults and fissures. Its diet consists primarily of lizards. Potential habitat for 

this species within the proposed launch site is very limited, and occurs mainly along the 

limestone ridge bisecting the western portion of the site. No desert lyre snakes were observed in 

the proposed launch site during the January or April 2005 biological surveys. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-15

Texas horned lizard (Phrynosoma cornutum) 

Sometimes referred to as the horned toad, this reptile species is state-listed as threatened. 

Historical distribution ranged from Colorado, Kansas, and southwestern Missouri south through 

southeastern Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Texas into northern Mexico. It is 

found in all regions of Texas except for the piney woods and marine environments. 

(BISON 2005b) This lizard inhabits flat, open generally arid regions with loose soils supporting 

bunchgrass, juniper, mesquite, acacia and succulents. Diet consists primarily of harvester ants, 

but other small arthropods may be eaten. Since this generalist species is found in a variety of 

habitats, it could occur within the proposed launch site. No Texas horned lizards were observed 

during biological surveys in April 2005. 

Trans-Pecos black-headed snake (Tantilla cucullata)

Listed as threatened in Texas, this mainly nocturnal, secretive species is difficult to detect. It is a 

nocturnal and fossorial species that burrows into soft soils. It occurs in mesquite-creosote scrub 

and piñon-juniper-oak woodland habitats. Its diet consists of insects, spiders, and other 

invertebrates. The creosote bush portion of the proposed launch site provides suitable habitat for 

this species. No Trans-Pecos black-headed snakes were observed within the proposed launch 

site during biological surveys in April 2005. 

On March 25, 2006 the FAA sent a letter to the USFWS regarding potential impact on threatened 

or endangered species from the proposed action. In the letter the FAA determined that formal 

consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act is not warranted. The FAA 

requested USFWS comments and/or concurrence with this determination. On May 23, 2006, the 

FAA received a response from the USFWS that concurred with the FAA’s determination that it 

is unlikely that any federally listed threatened or endangered species would occur in the project 

area. The USFWS requested that the FAA review the potential for ground water development 

directly or indirectly associated with the project to impact springs in Jeff Davis and Reeves 

counties which host the federally endangered Comanche Springs pupfish and Pecos gambusia. A 

discussion of possible ground water impacts from the proposed action is included in Section 4 of 

this EA. 

3.3 Cultural/Native American Resources 

3.3.1 Definition of Resource 

Cultural resources are those aspects of the physical environment relating to human culture, 

society, and cultural institutions that hold communities together and link them to their 

surroundings. Cultural resources include past and present expressions of human culture and 

history in the physical environment, such as prehistoric and historic sites, buildings, structures, 

objects, districts, natural features, and biota, which are considered important to a culture, 

subculture, or community. Cultural resources also include aspects of the physical environment 

that are a part of traditional life ways and practices, and are associated with community values 

and institutions. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-16

Cultural resources include prehistoric and historic resources and ethnographic resources. 

Prehistoric and historic resources are the tangible remains of past activities that show use or 

modification by people. They are distinct geographic areas that can include artifacts, features 

such as hearths, rock alignments, trails, rock art, roads, landscape alterations, or architecture. In 

general, prehistoric and historic resources are the loci of purposeful human activity that has 

resulted in the deposition of cultural materials beyond the level of a few accidentally lost 

artifacts. Deposits that do not meet this criterion are still cultural in nature, but are described as 

isolated occurrences. Prehistoric resources show use or modification by people before the 

establishment of a European presence in west Texas in the mid 17th century. Historic resources 

show use or modification after the arrival of Europeans in the region. 

The National Register of Historic Places (National Register) is a listing of buildings, structures, 

sites, districts, and objects that are considered significant at a national, state, or local level. 

Cultural resources that are listed on the National Register or have been determined eligible for 

listing have been documented and evaluated according to uniform standards, and have been 

found to meet criteria of significance and other requirements for listing. Cultural resources that 

meet the criteria and requirements for listing on the National Register are called historic 

properties. 

Cultural resources that have a direct association with a living culture may be considered 

ethnographic resources. Ethnographic resources are associated with the cultural practices, 

beliefs, and traditional history of a community. They are used within social, spiritual, political, 

and economic contexts, and are important to the preservation and viability of a culture. 

Examples of ethnographic resources include places that play an important role in oral histories, 

such as a particular rock formation, the confluence of two rivers, or a rock cairn; large areas, 

such as landscapes and viewscapes; sacred sites and places important for religious practices; 

natural resources traditionally used by people such as plant communities or clay deposits; and 

places such as trails or camping locations. The components of an ethnographic resource can be 

man-made or natural. If an ethnographic resource is found to meet the criteria and requirements 

for listing on the National Register, it is called a traditional cultural property (TCP). A TCP is 

generally defined as a property “that is eligible for inclusion in the National Register because of 

its association with cultural practices or beliefs of a living community that are rooted in that 

community’s history, and are important in maintaining the continuing cultural identity of the 

community.” (Parker and King 1990) 

3.3.2 Regulatory Setting 

A number of Federal statutes address cultural resources and Federal responsibilities regarding 

them. The long history of legal jurisdiction over cultural resources, dating back to 1906 with the 

passage of the Antiquities Act (16 U.S.C. 431-433), demonstrates a continuing concern on the 

part of Americans for their cultural resources. Foremost among these statutes is the National 

Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470). Section 106 of this 

statute requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of Federal undertakings on any 

property that is included on or eligible for inclusion on the National Register. The regulations 

that implement Section 106 (36 CFR Part 800) describe the process for identification and 

evaluation of cultural resources, assessment of effects of Federal actions on historic properties or 

TCPs, and consultation to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects. The NHPA does not 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-17

require preservation of cultural resources, but does ensure that Federal agency decisions 

concerning the treatment of these resources result from meaningful consideration of cultural and 

historic values, and identification of options available to protect the resources. 

The Federal government recognizes its unique relationship with Native American tribal 

governments and respects tribal sovereignty and self-government. Various Federal statutes have 

been enacted that establish and define a trust relationship with tribes. Specific statutes, 

regulations, and executive orders guide consultation with Native Americans to identify cultural 

resources important to tribes and to address tribal concerns about potential impacts to these 

resources. Those relevant to the proposed project are the NHPA and its implementing 

regulations (36 CFR Part 800.2), American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 

1996), and Executive Order 13175 Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments (65 Federal Register [FR] 67249). This legislation calls on agencies to consult 

with Native American tribal leaders and others knowledgeable about cultural resources important 

to them. Consultation is conducted for Federal actions with the potential to affect locations of 

traditional concern, religious practices and areas where they are carried out, areas of traditional 

cultural uses, archaeological sites, and other modern and ancestral tribal resources. 

3.3.3 Region of Influence 

Information on prehistoric and historic resources that could be impacted by the proposed 

alternatives was collected through a systematic cultural resource inventory of the Area of 

Potential Effect (APE), shown on Exhibit 3-5. This systematic inventory included a site records 

search and an intensive pedestrian field survey. For discussions in this EA, the Region of 

Influence (ROI) for prehistoric and historic resources is equivalent to the APE. Information on 

ethnographic resources and potential impacts to them is being collected through consultation 

with Tribes. The ROI for ethnographic resources includes the APE for consideration of physical 

impacts and the region surrounding the proposed launch site for visual and auditory impacts. 

The results of the site records search and pedestrian field survey are described in an inventory 

report prepared by Geo-Marine, Inc. (Geo-Marine, Inc., 2005) 

3.3.4 Existing Conditions 

3.3.4.1 Cultural Background of the Proposed Launch Site 

The proposed launch site is located in the Trans-Pecos culture region, but at the boundary with 

the Jornada region. This area has not received much attention by archaeologists due to the 

predominance of privately-owned land and the remoteness of the area. Thus, the information 

available from which to develop a cultural background of prehistory and history is limited. The 

information presented here is directly from the cultural context provided in the cultural resource 

inventory report prepared for the proposed project. (Geo-Marine, Inc. 2005) 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-18

Exhibit 3-5. Area of Potential Effect 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-19

The Paleo-Indian period in the project region, dating from approximately 10,000 to 6000 B.C., is 

characterized by small, mobile bands who subsisted on hunting large mammals such as 

mammoth and bison. Toward the end of this period, it is believed that these people were 

beginning to include smaller game such as big horn sheep and deer in the higher elevations. 

Information on the earlier portion of this period must come from evidence found in the nearby 

Southern Plains and further to the west, as no sites have been found in the project region. 

However, later Paleo-Indian sites have been found in the Trans-Pecos, though they are not 

numerous. 

The Archaic period is generally characterized by broad-spectrum hunting and gathering by small 

groups that traveled seasonally throughout the year within large territories. In the project region, 

the emphasis seems to be on hunting small mammals, along with a broad-based reliance on a 

diverse range of plants. During this period, from 6000 B.C. to A.D. 200, populations started to 

increase dramatically, and later in the period, habitation sites are more numerous and larger. 

Archaic sites are found in a wide variety of environmental zones, illustrating the dependence on 

a wide variety of plants and animals. As in other neighboring culture regions, especially to the 

north and west, ceramics appeared during the Archaic period in the Trans-Pecos. However, 

unlike other neighboring regions, no evidence has been found to indicate the presence of 

horticulture. 

During the Formative period, dating from A.D. 400 to 1450, use of the landscape, technologies, 

and subsistence all changed. Toward the end of the period the use of cacti and succulents seems 

to decrease, and there is little evidence of the use of horticulture until the very end of the period. 

Hunting of small to medium sized mammals continued throughout the period. Sedentism 

increased slightly, and throughout the period there was a gradual shift to the use of more 

substantial house structures. Preferences for settlement of various landforms fluctuated 

throughout the period. 

The Historic era begins with the establishment of a European presence in the region in the mid 

17th century. By 1659, the first outpost and mission had been established in the El Paso area. 

Military forts were constructed and they provided protection to the Chihuahua Trail, a commerce 

and information artery that connected Mexico with the Southwest. It was not until after 1848, 

with the annexation of Mexican lands by the United States, that Anglo-Americans substantially 

settled the Trans-Pecos region. To deal with marauding Native Americans, primarily Apaches 

and Comanches, forts were built and troops deployed to protect settlers. In the 1860s, attention 

was paid to exploiting the region for silver mining. The relocation of troops away from the forts 

to the southeastern United States during the Civil War resulted in many settlers being forced out 

of the area due to raiding activities of the Native Americans. The 1880s saw the end of Indian 

hostilities and the arrival of the railroads, resulting in significant increases in settlement of the 

region. Along with the railroads came cattle ranching, which became a leading industry for the 

region. Silver and tin mining remained important enterprises in the late 19th and early 20th

centuries. In recent times, tourism has replaced agriculture as the leading industry. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-20

3.3.4.2 Prehistoric and Historic Resources Identified in the Proposed Launch Site 

Area 

A cultural resource inventory was conducted for the proposed project to identify prehistoric and 

historic resources. (Geo-Marine, Inc. 2005) The inventory included an intensive pedestrian field 

survey of the APE. A total of three square kilometers (765 acres) were surveyed. A total of 36 

prehistoric and historic resources were identified, which include seven sites and 29 isolated 

occurrences. Exhibit 3-6 lists each identified site, its eligibility for the National Register, and the 

portion of the area around the proposed launch site where it is located. The 29 isolated 

occurrences were found in all areas of the APE. They include ground stone artifacts, projectile 

points, other chipped stone artifacts, chipped stone flakes, and fire-cracked rock. None of the 

isolated occurrences are eligible for listing on the National Register. 

Exhibit 3-6. Prehistoric and Historic Sites Identified in the APE 

Resource 

Number Description 

National 

Register 

Eligibility 

Location around 

Proposed Launch Site

41CU692 Scatter of ground stone and chipped 

stone artifacts 

Not 

eligible 

Southern perimeter 

fence 

41CU693 Scatter of fire-cracked rock and 

chipped stone artifacts 

Not 

eligible 

Western perimeter 

fence 

41CU694 Scatter of chipped stone artifacts Not 

eligible 

Northwestern perimeter 

fence 

41CU695 Scatter of thermal features and chipped 

stone, ground stone, and ceramic 

artifact shards 

Eligible Northwestern perimeter 

fence 

41CU696 Scatter of thermal features and chipped 

stone, ground stone, and ceramic 

artifact shards 

Eligible South entrance road 

41CU697 Scatter of fire-cracked rock and 

chipped stone, ground stone, and 

ceramic artifact shards 

Not 

eligible 

South entrance road 

41CU698 Scatter of fire-cracked rock and 

chipped stone and ground stone 

artifacts 

Not 

eligible 

Northwestern perimeter 

fence re-route 

 National Register = National Register of Historic Places 

All of the identified resources were recorded and evaluated to determine if they are eligible for 

listing on the National Register. The Texas SHPO has reviewed and concurred with the 

eligibility determinations. Resources that are eligible are afforded protection under the NHPA. 

If a Federal action will affect an eligible resource, then measures must be considered to avoid, 

minimize, or mitigate the effect. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-21

3.3.4.3 Ethnographic Resources Identified around the Proposed Launch Site 

In accordance with Section 106 of the NHPA, 14 Native American tribes have been contacted as 

potentially interested parties that may have cultural ties to the region. They were selected based 

on ethnographic studies conducted in the region for Carlsbad Caverns National Park and the 

Guadalupe Mountains National Park. (Hendricks and Thomas 2004) The following tribes were 

contacted. 

• Apache Tribe of Oklahoma 

• Comanche Nation of Oklahoma 

• Fort Sill Apache Tribe 

• Hopi Tribe 

• Jicarilla Apache Nation 

• Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma 

• Mescalero Apache Tribe 

• Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma 

• Pueblo of Isleta 

• Pueblo of Zia 

• San Carlos Apache Tribe 

• White Mountain Apache Tribe 

• Ysleta del Sur Pueblo 

• Zuni Tribe 

To date, none of the contacted tribes has indicated concerns for cultural resources that would be 

impacted by the proposed project. 

3.4 Hazardous Materials/Waste Management 

3.4.1 Definition of Resource 

Hazardous materials and hazardous waste include substances that, because of their quantity, 

concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics, may present substantial danger 

to the public health, welfare, or the environment when released. 

3.4.2 Regulatory Setting 

EPA regulates hazardous chemicals, substances, and wastes under the Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 

Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), and the Toxic Substances Control Act. EPA has delegated 

responsibility for the RCRA regulations in the state of Texas to the TCEQ. The state of Texas 

has also established regulations governing aboveground storage tanks storing petroleum products 

(Texas Administrative Code, Title 30 - Environmental Quality, Chapter 334, Subchapter F) and 

other hazardous materials. 

Tanks and other facilities for the storage of hazardous materials must be designed to comply with 

Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure rules as outlined in 40 CFR Part 112. Any 

accidental releases of hazardous materials must be reported to the National Response Center if 

the quantity of the material released exceeds its reportable quantity. (Reportable quantities for 

hazardous substances are listed in 40 CFR §302.4 and 40 CFR Part 355.) Section 304(a) of the 

Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act, see 40 CFR §355.40, requires that 

accidental releases of hazardous materials be reported to the appropriate State Emergency 

Response Commission and Local Emergency Planning Committees if the release is greater than 

the reportable quantity. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-22

The U.S. DOT has established requirements for the safe transport of hazardous materials. The 

Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 1975 (49 U.S.C. 1801) gives the DOT authority to 

regulate shipments of hazardous materials by air, highway, or rail. The DOT regulations govern 

safety aspects of transporting hazardous materials, including packing, repacking, handling, 

labeling, marking, placarding, and routing. 

3.4.3 Region of Influence 

There are no municipal solid waste disposal facilities currently operating in Culberson County. 

Waste generated within the county is transported to one of eight disposal facilities under the 

jurisdiction of the Rio Grande Council of Governments, which is the regional municipal solid 

waste planning authority for Culberson and five adjoining counties in southwest Texas. [The Rio 

Grande Council of Governments includes Brewster, Culberson, El Paso, Hudspeth, Jeff Davis, 

Presidio counties in Texas and portions of Dona Ana County in New Mexico.] Total remaining 

landfill capacity in the state of Texas as of the end of 2003 was 1.15 billion cubic meters (1.51 

billion cubic yards), of which 12 million metric tons (12 million tons) of capacity is within the 

Rio Grande Council of Governments area. (TCEQ 2004) 

TCEQ periodically assesses the need for commercial hazardous waste management capacity for 

Texas-generated waste. A recent TCEQ needs assessment indicates the availability of hazardous 

waste treatment and disposal capacity is expected to exceed demand based on projected 

generation rates within the state of Texas. The estimated in-state demand for incineration of 

hazardous waste represents less than 40 percent of the available capacity at permitted 

commercial facilities located in the state of Texas. The in-state demand for hazardous waste 

landfill space represents less than one percent of the available permitted capacity in Texas. 

(TCEQ 2002) The projected demand for commercial hazardous waste management in Texas is 

concentrated along the upper Gulf coast and metropolitan areas such as Dallas-Ft. Worth. There 

is minimal demand or capacity for hazardous waste management in the immediate vicinity of the 

proposed site. 

3.4.4 Existing Conditions 

The only facilities currently on the proposed site are a trailer (with a portable generator) and 

several groundwater wells powered by windmills. Current activities at the proposed launch site 

require very limited use of hazardous materials (fuel for portable generator) or waste 

management. There is currently no hazardous waste or wastewater generation at the site. The 

small amount of solid waste generated (household garbage) is transported off site for disposal at 

existing facilities in the region. 

3.5 Land Use (including Farmland and Section 4(f) Resources) 

3.5.1 Definition of Resource 

EPA defines land use as “...the way land is developed and used in terms of the kinds of 

anthropogenic activities that occur (e.g., agriculture, residential areas, industrial areas).” (EPA 

2003) Humans develop land for a variety of purposes that can include economic production, 

natural resource protection, or institutional uses. Land use in the U.S. is typically regulated in 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-23

some manner by land use plans, policies, or ordinances that stipulate the permissible uses within 

an area. Such land classification types can include agricultural, forestry, urban, inland water 

bodies, and other categories. Land use classifications are then often sub-classified for more 

specific purposes such as low-density residential or light industrial uses. (FAA 2001) 

Regulations regarding land use can occur on a local, state, or Federal level to manage military 

installations, or to protect sensitive areas such as historic properties, prime or unique farmlands, 

national parks, wildlife refuges, or other areas that are afforded special status. However land use 

planning and regulations that designate acreages or parcels for residential, commercial, or 

industrial uses generally occur at the local and municipal levels. (FAA 2001) 

3.5.2 Regulatory Setting 

Land use management practices are subject to mandates of the controlling agency, while nonFederal lands are often subject to the collective guidance and regulations of local, county, and 

state entities. Land use management and planning approaches are intricate processes that seek to 

provide protection of resource values that may be present on site as well as off-site in the 

surrounding community. (FAA 2001) 

The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) (7 U.S.C. 4201-4209) requires the cooperation of 

Federal agencies to minimize their contribution to the unnecessary and irreversible conversion of 

private programs and policies to protect farmland. For Blue Origin proposed launch operations, 

the launch site is located on private land and is privately funded; therefore, the FPPA does not 

apply. 

FAA Order 1050.1E outlines significant impacts thresholds for Section 4(f) properties. As 

described in FAA Order 1050.1E, significant impacts would occur when a proposed action either 

involves more than a minimal physical use of a section 4(f) property or is deemed a “constructive 

use” substantially impairing the 4(f) property, and mitigation measures do not eliminate or 

reduce the effects of the use below the threshold of significance (e.g., by replacement in kind of a 

neighborhood park). Substantial impairment would occur when impacts to section 4(f) lands are 

sufficiently serious that the value of the site in terms of its prior significance and enjoyment are 

substantially reduced or lost. If there is a physical or constructive use, the FAA is responsible 

for complying with section 4(f) even if the impact is less than significant for NEPA purposes. 

3.5.3 Region of Influence 

Land use includes the land on and adjacent to the site, the physical features that influence current 

or proposed uses, pertinent land use plans and regulations, and land ownership and availability. 

The ROI for this EA includes the Corn Ranch and private land immediately surrounding the site 

located within the valley between the Delaware Mountains, and the Sierra Diablos. 

3.5.4 Existing Conditions 

The proposed launch facility lies within a large, privately owned property known as the “Corn 

Ranch.” The Corn Ranch consists of desert scrubland and grassland that was settled in the late 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-24

19th century and used as ranch land until 2004. The Corn Ranch is now maintained by the 

property owner as a wildlife management area and for personal use. 

The nearest towns to the Corn Ranch are Dell City, Texas (113 kilometers [70 miles]), Salt Flat 

(80 kilometers [50 miles]), Pine Springs (72 kilometers [45 miles]) and Nickel Creek (80 

kilometers [50 miles]) to the north and Van Horn, Texas to the south (32 kilometers [20 miles]). 

State Highway 54 intersects Interstate I-10 in Van Horn. The only public access to the Corn 

Ranch is via State Highway 54. 

Most of the land within a 40-kilometer (25-mile) radius of the proposed launch facility is 

privately owned. This land includes working farms and cattle ranches and former ranch 

properties that are now leased to groups of hunters and managed for game species, primarily 

mule deer. None of the ranches in the area raises significant number of cattle. The only 

industrial facilities in the general vicinity of the proposed launch facility are the Texas 

Architectural Aggregates Mine, approximately eight kilometers (five miles) to the west of the 

site, and the Delaware Mountain Wind Farm, approximately 16 kilometers (10 miles) to the 

northeast. The Texas Architectural Aggregates Mine is owned and operated by Texas 

Aggregates Incorporated; the Delaware Wind Farm is owned and operated by FPL Energy. A 

permanent easement for a natural gas pipeline owned by Kinder Morgan crosses the ranch 

approximately 24 kilometers (15 miles) north of the proposed launch site. 

No state or county parks or recreation areas lie within 80 kilometers (50 miles) of the proposed 

launch site (Texas 2005). Guadalupe Mountains National Park (Texas) and Carlsbad Caverns 

National Park (New Mexico) are 35 and 60 kilometers (22 and 37 miles), respectively, north of 

the proposed launch site. Guadalupe Mountains National Park is a 348-square kilometer 

(86,000-acre) park that receives approximately 180,000 visitors annually. Carlsbad Caverns 

National Park, a 190-square kilometer (47,000-acre) park, receives more than 400,000 visitors 

annually. The Guadalupe Ranger District of the Lincoln National Forest lies immediately 

northwest of Carlsbad Caverns National Park. The Lincoln National Forest’s three Ranger 

Districts cover more than a million acres in southeastern New Mexico. 

3.6 Visual Resources 

3.6.1 Definition of Resource 

Visual resources are defined as natural and man-made features that constitute the aesthetic 

qualities of an area. Landforms, surface waters, vegetation and man-made features are the 

fundamental characteristics of an area that define the visual environment and form the overall 

impression that an observer receives of an area. (FAA 2004) 

The importance of visual resources and any changes in the visual character of an area is 

influenced by social considerations, including the public value placed on the area, public 

awareness of the area, and community concern for the visual resources in the area. (FAA 2004) 

The visual resources of an area and any proposed changes to these resources could be evaluated 

in terms of “visual dominance” and “visual sensitivity.” Visual dominance describes the level of 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-25

noticeability that occurs as the result of a visual change in an area. Visual sensitivity depends on 

the setting of an area. 

Visual Dominance. Proposed changes in the character of an area can be defined in terms of 

visual dominance. For example, if the users of the area would overlook the changes to the area’s 

setting, then the changes would be “not noticeable.” If the changes would be noticeable, but 

would be dominated by other features in the area’s setting, then the changes would be “visually 

subordinate.” A change that would compete with the visual character of an area is “visually codominant.” Finally, a change that would detract from the character of the setting and would 

demand attention is “visually dominant.” (FAA 2004) 

Visual Sensitivity. Visual sensitivity depends on the particular setting in which the proposed 

action is to occur. Areas such as coastlines, national parks, recreation areas, and wilderness 

areas are areas of high visual sensitivity. In these areas, viewers tend to be aware of even very 

small changes in the visual environment. On the other hand, in the area of low sensitivity such 

as industrial areas, major changes can occur without undue notice to observers. (FAA 2004) 

3.6.2 Regulatory Setting 

Though dependent on physical location, many environments within the U.S. include regions of 

rich aesthetic and visual resources as well as designated and undesignated areas of great natural 

beauty and scenic diversity. Visual and aesthetic resources commonly fall under several 

different formal designations including national forest; national monument; national, state, or 

county parks; national wildlife refuges; wilderness areas; wild and scenic rivers; national trails; 

privately-owned land; and historic places and districts. Various roads also may be designated as 

scenic byways due to their scenic, historic, and cultural qualities. (FAA 2001) 

3.6.3 Region of Influence 

The ROI for visual resources includes the geographic area from which the launch site facilities 

and access roads may be seen. This would generally involve nearby higher elevations and public 

roadways (State Highway 54). 

3.6.4 Existing Conditions 

The Corn Ranch property encompasses a broad valley at elevation 1,097-1,189 meters (3,600-

3,900 feet) above mean sea level with a northwest-southeast orientation. The Delaware 

Mountains rise to the east of the valley floor, and reach heights of approximately 1,737 meters 

(5,700 feet) (see Exhibit 3-7). The rugged and more picturesque Sierra Diablos rise more steeply 

to the west, and reach heights of approximately 2,042 meters (6,700 feet) (see Exhibit 3-8). The 

valley, which is approximately 16 kilometers (10 miles) wide, consists of desert scrubland and 

arid grassland historically used for cattle ranching. The most significant man-made feature of 

the area from a visual-aesthetic perspective is State Highway 54, a two-lane blacktop that 

connects Interstate 10 to State Highways 62 and 180 (Exhibit 3-9). 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-26

Exhibit 3-7. View of Proposed Launch Site Looking Northeast toward the Delaware 

Mountains from State Highway 54 

Exhibit 3-8. View from the Ridge on Proposed Site Looking to the West toward 

the Sierra Diablo Mountains 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-27

Exhibit 3-9. State Highway 54 at the Corn Ranch Facing Northeast 

A small number of ranch houses and outbuildings lie along the approximately 64 kilometers (40 

miles) of Highway 54 that extend from the Beach Mountains, south of Corn Ranch to the 

Guadalupe Mountains, north of Corn Ranch. The existing conditions at the Corn Ranch would 

be rated as moderate to high visual sensitivity. 

The boundary of the proposed Blue Origin launch site lies approximately five kilometers (three 

miles) east of Highway 54. The proposed launch site, which is roughly 10 kilometers (six miles) 

long by eight kilometers (five miles) wide (approximately 75 square kilometers [18,600 acres]), 

appears to be flat but its western boundary is actually several hundred feet lower in elevation 

than its eastern boundary. A low limestone ridge, approximately eight meters (25 feet) higher 

than surrounding land, parallels Highway 54 for several miles, screening motorists from much of 

the area where facilities would be sited. 

The view in the foreground from State Highway 54 is of desert land with light green or brown 

grasses and dark green shrubs dotting the tan colored soil with an occasional black and green 

mesquite or yucca protruding above the shrubs (see Exhibit 3-7). The roadside is dotted with 

barbed wire fencing, gates, cattle pens, telephone/power poles and occasional road signs. In the 

background, the desert landscape fades to black and white and the Delaware Mountain range 

frames the horizon. Faint white shapes can be seen from the road on the desert. Typically, these 

are unimproved roads or one of the three ridges of limestone rock outcrops on the horizon. 

In the mountains approximately 24 kilometers (15 miles) to the north of the proposed site there is 

a moderate size wind farm (Delaware Mountain Wind Farm). Only 7 to 10 windmills are visible 

from within the valley and they do not protrude above the mountain range. The windmills are 

only visible to the naked eye when the sun is setting in the west and visibility is moderate to 

high. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-28

Military aircraft perform overflights of the valley at low level (152 to 610 meters [500 to 2000 

feet]) on a daily basis. The military jets are generally heard before they are seen; the 

shapes/outlines of the aircraft are difficult to pick out against the mountain landscape. When 

they bank and cross the valley floor, they are immediately visible, however. 

Current light sources include a dozen homes in the valley, vehicle headlights on State 

Highway 54 and warning lights on the Delaware Mountain Wind Farm. 

3.7 Noise 

3.7.1 Definition of Resource 

Sound results when air or other media vibrate. The vibrations may be a combination of many 

frequencies to produce a complex sound. Humans are sensitive to vibrations with frequencies 

ranging from 20 to 20,000 cycles per second (hertz), with greatest sensitivity between 2,000 and 

4,000 hertz. The energy of the vibrations is a measure of the “loudness” of the sound. Sound 

levels are measured in decibels (dB), which are calculated in mathematical terms from a ratio of 

the sound level to a reference sound level, which is generally the threshold of hearing. To make 

the decibel unit more applicable to the human response to sound frequencies, a variation of the 

unit has been created known as the A-weighted decibel (dBA). Another sound level weighting is 

the C-weighted scale (dBC) which emphasizes low frequency sounds. A remote desert 

environment generally has sound levels in the range of 22 to 38 dBA, whereas, an interstate 

highway interchange might have sound levels in the 55 to 70 dBA range. A low-level jet flyover 

could have sound approximately 100 dBA, depending on altitude and power level. Very large 

rocket launches such as the Space Shuttle have sound levels around 175 dBA at 50 feet from the 

test pad. Humans begin to experience pain at levels above 100 dBA. The Programmatic EIS for 

Licensing Launches (FAA 2001) has more complete information about sound and its 

measurement. 

3.7.2 Regulatory Setting 

Noise is primarily regulated through local noise ordinances, which are designed to protect noise 

sensitive areas (e.g., residential population centers and schools). Federally regulated noise 

standards are designed to protect worker safety, and various commercial standards address 

commercial aircraft noise. 

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulation 1910.95 establishes a 

maximum noise level of 90 dBA for a continuous eight-hour exposure during a working day and 

higher levels for shorter exposure time in the workplace. The EPA has recommended an average 

equivalent noise level of 70 dBA for continuous 24-hour exposure to noise to protect hearing 

(EPA 1974). Noise also may be impulsive in nature. Under OSHA regulation 1910.95, 

exposure to impulse noise should not exceed 140 dBA. The 140 dBA threshold should be 

considered advisory rather than mandatory. The FAA regulates the noise associated with 

commercial aircraft at 14 CFR Part 36. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-29

3.7.3 Region of Influence 

Noise from the proposed action would affect the area surrounding the launch site and along State 

Highway 54. This region is a typical, remote, desert environment as described more thoroughly 

in other sections of this chapter. 

3.7.4 Existing Conditions 

The baseline noise levels in the region of the proposed launch site are those typical of a remote 

desert – approximately 22 to 38 dBA. (FAA 2001) There is occasional road noise on State 

Highway 54 and aircraft noise, from commercial jetliners and military aircraft. Road noise is 

intermittent and of low intensity, associated with car and light-truck traffic on the state highway. 

Commercial airliners occasionally pass overhead at 7,620 to 20,668 meters (25,000 to 35,000 

feet) and are relatively unobtrusive. Military aircraft from Holloman Air Force Base, New 

Mexico, and other installations occasionally conduct low-level navigation flights over the Sierra 

Diablo and Delaware Mountain ranges and, depending on altitude and lateral distance, can 

produce noise levels high enough to startle animals and annoy humans. The Air Force has 

prepared an Environmental Impact Statement on the Holloman low-level flights, indicating 

maximum noise levels for five aircraft types ranging from 88 to 115 dBA at 152 meters (500 

feet) altitude. (United States Air Force [USAF] 1998) There are no noise sensitive receptors 

within the ROI. The nearest noise sensitive areas are Guadalupe Mountains National Park and 

Carlsbad Caverns National Park. The southern boundary of Guadalupe Mountains National Park 

is 42 kilometers (26 miles) from the Blue Origin landing pad and 45 kilometers (28 miles) from 

the launch complex. The southern boundary of Carlsbad Caverns National Park is 64 kilometers 

(40 miles) from the Blue Origin landing pad and 68 kilometers (42 miles) from the launch 

complex. 

3.8 Geology and Soils (including Floodplains) 

3.8.1 Definition of Resource 

Geology and soils are those Earth resources that may be described in terms of landforms, 

geology, and soil conditions. The makeup of geology and soils within a given physiographic 

region influences the occurrence of vegetation types, the presence of mineral or energy 

resources, the presence of ground water resources, and the potential for seismicity and associated 

risks such as earthquakes and landslides. 

Geology 

Geology is the study of the composition and configuration of the Earth’s surface and subsurface 

features. The general shape and arrangement of a land surface, including its height and the 

position of its natural and man-made features, is referred to as topography. The topography of 

the land surface affects the general direction of surface water and ground water flow. 

Groundwater is stored and transmitted underground in aquifers that supply lakes and rivers and is 

often used for human purposes, such as drinking water and irrigation for crops. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-30

Soils 

Soil is defined as the surface layer of the Earth, composed of minerals and fine rock material 

disintegrated by geological processes and humus, the organic remains of decomposed vegetation. 

Soils and sediments are typically described in terms of their composition, slope, and physical 

characteristics. Differences among soil types in terms of their structure, organic and chemical 

properties, elasticity, strength, shrink-swell potential, and erosion potentially affect their ability 

to support or sustain agricultural, structural, filtration, and natural detoxification purposes. The 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) has classified over 

20,000 types of soils in the U.S., including areas classified as prime and unique farmlands. 

Information pertaining to a given area’s soil types is typically available from county soil surveys. 

The three principal types of soil are clay, sand, and loam. Factors determining the nature of soil 

are vegetation type, climate, parent rock material, elevation, and the geological age of the 

developing soil. Soil and sediment characteristics vary significantly depending upon their 

physical location and can be compounded by environmental factors. For example, some soils in 

the U.S. are naturally more acidic than others in the country. 

Floodplains 

Based on definitions in Executive Order 11988 (“Floodplain Management;” 42 Federal Register 

26951), there are no floodplains on the proposed launch site, only gullies and arroyos that 

convey water after thundershowers. 

3.8.2 Regulatory Setting 

Geology 

No specific regulatory standards pertain to geology other than best management practices 

(BMPs) and building codes that must be adhered to within seismic zones. 

Soils 

While the USDA has designated specific soils as prime and unique farmlands, no additional 

regulations govern soils. State-implemented BMPs are in place to control erosion and prevent 

runoff and stream sedimentation. 

3.8.3 Region of Influence 

The Region of Influence for impacts to geology and soils is considered to be defined by the 

boundaries of the Blue Origin property. Because all proposed launches are to be vertical in 

nature, various engineering controls would ensure that these assumptions remain valid during 

launch and recovery activities. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-31

3.8.4 Existing Conditions 

3.8.4.1 Geology 

The launch site is located in West Texas within the Trans-Pecos region of the Basin and Range 

Physiographic Province in West Texas. The Trans-Pecos region of West Texas encompasses the 

area west of the Pecos River, bounded on the south and west by the Rio Grande River. Evidence 

suggests that most of this region is underlain by Precambrian rocks. Cambrian to Pennsylvanian 

rocks crop out in this region. The rocks in the region represent a marine sequence caught 

between the North American continent and an unidentified continent during the Pennsylvanian 

Period and thrust onto the North American continent. Local deformation occurred during the 

Laramide Orogeny from Late Cretaceous to Early Tertiary. Late Tertiary extensional (rift) 

tectonics resulted in high angle normal faults creating the Basin and Range structures and related 

north-south trending mountains. Large basins formed between the ranges and were subsequently 

filled with thick gravel and sand eroded from the adjacent mountains. (Angle 2001) 

The proposed launch site is located in the northern portion of the Wildhorse Flat sub-basin of the 

greater Salt Basin, a closed basin with surface drainage resulting from ephemeral streams and 

flowing toward the center of the basin. Underlying strata at the location are primarily of Permian 

age and consist mainly of limestone, dolomite, sandstone, and some siltstone. Salt Basin 

sediments are generally Late Tertiary and Quaternary sands, silts, clays, gravels, caliche, and 

evaporites. Overlying these deposits is unconsolidated alluvium including sands, silts, clay, and 

gravel. (Barnes 1979) 

The extensional faulting that formed the Salt Basin is more extensive along the western margin 

of the basin and has resulted in subsidence, while the eastern margin acts as a hinge. Quaternary 

faults cutting the basin fill in the region are generally north or northwest trending, high angle 

normal faults and are mostly confined to the western margin of the bolson (a basin filled with 

sediments) and are more continuous in this area. These faults trend parallel to zones in 

Precambrian and Paleozoic rocks covered by the basin fill. There is no apparent evidence of 

faults cutting the basin fill within the site boundary. 

3.8.4.2 Potential Natural Geologic Hazards 

Occurrences of potential natural geologic hazards are listed below. 

Seismicity – Seismic activity in this area is mostly associated with the Rio Grande Rift region 

west of the site. The strongest recorded earthquake in west Texas (magnitude 6 on the Richter 

scale) occurred in Valentine, Texas, about 97 kilometers (60 miles) southeast of the site, in 1931. 

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project 

(NSHMP) map of Texas (USGS NSHMP 2002) shows that the peak acceleration expected at the 

site is 14-16%g with a 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years (Exhibit 3-10). This represents 

a relatively low risk from seismic activity. By contrast, the peak acceleration expected in the 

Albuquerque, New Mexico area is approximately 20%g with a 2% probability of exceedance in 

50 years and the peak acceleration expected in the Salt Lake City, UT area is approximately 

60%g with a 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years. Additionally, the facilities would be 

sited, designed, and built to prevent damage from a possible earthquake. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-32

Exhibit 3-10. Seismic Hazard Map 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-33

Flooding – Although average annual rainfall is low (28 centimeters [11 inches] per year) (Larkin 

and Bomar 1983) at the launch site, and it would not be located in the 100-year floodplain 

(Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map), localized flooding is 

possible. This is of most concern when associated with ephemeral streams. The terrain on 

which the facilities would be located slopes downward gently from east to west and there are 

well-defined drainage features that convey water from high to low areas. The potential for 

flooding in the proposed facility areas is low. 

3.8.4.3 Soils

Soils at the proposed site fall into two broad classifications. Generally the Reakor-Verhalen 

association is found in the eastern portion of the site and the Holloman-Reeves association is 

found in the western portion. These soil associations are well to moderately well drained. About 

50 percent of the Reakor-Verhalen association is Reakor soils composed of pink calcareous loam 

at the surface, underlain by light brown calcareous sandy loam, which is underlain by pink 

calcareous clay loam. Verhalen soils make up about 30 percent of this association and are 

comprised of grayish brown calcareous clay, underlain by brown calcareous clay, which is 

underlain by pink calcareous clay. Roughly 20 percent of this area is comprised of shallow soils, 

gravelly soils, and soils in the drainage ways. Holloman soils make up 60 percent of the 

Holloman-Reeves association and are comprised of pale brown calcareous clay loam, underlain 

by very pale brown calcareous strongly alkaline silt loam (approximately 70 percent of the 

volume of this layer is gypsum and calcium carbonate), underlain by brown calcareous strongly 

alkaline sandy clay loam. The Reeves soils make up about 25 percent of the association and are 

comprised of pale brown calcareous moderately saline sandy clay loam, underlain by light 

yellowish brown calcareous moderately saline silty clay loam, underlain by very pale brown 

calcareous moderately saline silty clay loam. The remaining soil is clayey overlying gypsum. 

(USDA-SCS 1991) 

3.8.4.4 Topography 

Topographic relief at the launch site is generally moderate (Exhibit 3-11) with an average slope 

of about 9.5 meters per kilometer (50 feet per mile). There is a fairly prominent ridge located in 

the southwestern portion of the site that separates the proposed facility locations from State 

Highway 54. Surface water generally flows from east to west in the area of the proposed launch 

site. On the infrequent occasions that it rains, water in the vicinity of the launch site would tend 

to flow to the west into the salt basin(s) between the site and State Highway 54. Runoff water 

from the Sierra Diablo Mountains would flow eastward into the same basin(s) and would not 

affect the launch site. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-34

Exhibit 3-11. Topographic Map 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-35

3.9 Socioeconomics (including Natural Resources and Energy Supply) 

3.9.1 Definition of Resource 

Socioeconomics include the social and economic indicators that are specific to the human 

environment. For the purposes of this document, social indicators include statistical data related 

to population distributions, ethnicity, home ownership, medical facilities, educational facilities, 

and other public amenities. Economic indicators are used to assess the economic health of a 

community, as well as to make forecasts concerning future economic conditions. For the 

purposes of this document, key economic indicators include employment trends, unemployment 

rates, income levels, and housing characteristics. 

Collectively, social and economic indicators are often referred to as socioeconomics. Much of 

the information that assists in evaluating the socioeconomic status of a given population is 

available from the U.S. Census Bureau on a national, state, or regional level. Site-specific 

socioeconomic data are available from the U.S. Census Bureau on a county, census block, and 

census tract level as well. More detailed information regarding a community’s educational 

institutions, medical services, and local employment information is typically available from the 

state or county governmental offices such as local Chambers of Commerce and the Bureau of 

Economics. 

FAA Order 1050.1E states that Executive Order 13123, Greening the Government Through 

Efficient Energy Management (64 FR 30851, June 8, 1999), encourages each Federal agency to 

expand the use of renewable energy within its facilities and in its activities. E.O. 13123 also 

requires each Federal agency to reduce petroleum use, total energy use and associated air 

emissions, and water consumption in its facilities. It is also the policy of the FAA, consistent 

with NEPA and the CEQ regulations, to encourage the development of facilities that exemplify 

the highest standards of design including principles of sustainability. All elements of the 

transportation system should be designed with a view to their aesthetic impact, conservation of 

resources such as energy, pollution prevention, harmonization with the community environment, 

and sensitivity to the concerns of the traveling public. This is in keeping with section 102(2)(A) 

of NEPA, which requires all agencies to “...utilize a systematic interdisciplinary approach, which 

will ensure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts 

in planning and in decisionmaking....”

3.9.2 Regulatory Setting 

Socioeconomic conditions are regulated through a host of Federal programs that provide for 

equal opportunity, anti-discrimination, and accessibility, as well as state and local ordinances. 

There are no special purpose laws for natural resources and energy supply. 

3.9.3 Region of Influence 

For socioeconomic analysis purposes, the ROI is defined as the area in which the principal direct 

and secondary socioeconomic effects of site actions are likely to occur and are expected to be of 

the most consequence for local jurisdictions. Socioeconomic characteristics addressed at the 

Blue Origin West Texas Commercial launch site include employment, income, population, 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-36

housing, and community services. These characteristics are analyzed for a two-county ROI, 

Culberson and Hudspeth Counties in Texas, where it is expected that the majority of the 

temporary and permanent launch site employees would reside. 

3.9.4 Existing Conditions 

3.9.4.1 Employment and Income 

The government sector employs the greatest number of workers in the ROI, providing 

27.8 percent of employment. Other important sectors of employment include farming (18.5 

percent); retail trade (13.5 percent); and services (10.7 percent). (BEA 2005) Exhibit 3-12 

details the largest employment sectors in the ROI. 

Exhibit 3-12. Largest Employment Sectors by Industry – 2003 

Culberson Hudspeth ROI Total Total Employment 

1,480 1,399 2,879 % of ROI 

Farm 176 357 533 18.5% 

Retail 311 78 389 13.5% 

Accommodation and food services 204 44 248 8.6% 

Other services, except public 

administration 

not 

available 

59 59 2.0% 

Government 370 430 800 27.8% 

Total % of largest employment 

sectors 

 2,029 70.5% 

Services 307 10.7% 

 Source: BEA 2005; TTNUS 2005 

The labor force in the ROI decreased at an average annual rate of -0.9 percent between 1995 and 

2004. The labor force in the State of Texas increased at an average annual rate of 1.7 percent 

over the same time period. (BLS 2005) Exhibit 3-13 details employment trends in the ROI. 

In 2004, employment in the ROI was 2,375, which constituted less than one percent of state 

employment. (BLS 2005) Employment in the ROI decreased at an average annual rate of -1.2 

percent between 1995 and 2004. At this rate, total employment in the ROI decreased at a 

slightly faster pace than the labor force. Employment in the State of Texas increased at an 

average annual rate of 1.7 percent over the same time period. (BLS 2005) 

Culberson County unemployment increased from 5.9 percent in 1995 to 7.9 percent in 2004. 

Hudspeth County unemployment increased from 2.0 percent in 1995 to 6.0 percent in 2004. The 

state-wide average unemployment remained unchanged at 6.1 percent in 1995 and in 2004. (BLS 

2005) 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-37

Exhibit 3-13. Employment Trends 

 1995 Culberson Hudspeth ROI Total Texas 

Labor Force 1,280 1,485 2,765 9,572,436 

Employment 1,205 1,456 2,661 8,985,635 

Unemployment 75 29 104 586,801 

Unemployment Rate 5.9% 2.0% 3.8% 6.1% 

 2004 Culberson Hudspeth ROI Total Texas 

Labor Force 1,108 1,440 2,548 11,035,379

Employment 1,021 1,354 2,375 10,362,982

Unemployment 87 86 173 672,397 

Unemployment Rate 7.9% 6.0% 6.8% 6.1% 

Labor Force % Change 

(average annual) -1.5% -0.3% -0.9% 1.7% 

Employment % 

Change (average 

annual) 

-1.7% -0.8% -1.2% 1.7% 

 Source: BLS 2005; TTNUS 2005 

Per capita income in 2003 was $15,522 in Culberson County and $16,482 in Hudspeth County. 

The average per capita income in the two-county ROI was $16,040, compared to the state of 

Texas average of $29,074. (BEA 2005) 

3.9.4.2 Population 

Between 1990 and 2004, the ROI population decreased from 6,322 to 6,027, an average annual 

decrease of -0.3 percent. Hudspeth County’s population increased at an average annual growth 

rate of 0.9 percent, while Culberson County’s population decreased at an average annual growth 

rate of -1.4 percent. (USCB 1990 and 2005) For the same period, the state of Texas grew at an 

average annual rate of 2.3 percent. 

Culberson and Hudspeth counties are both among the 25 least densely populated counties in the 

continental U.S. Based on an estimated population of 6,027 in the two counties in 2004 and a 

two-county area of 21,714 square kilometers (8,384 square miles) (USCB 2005), the population 

density in the ROI is less than one person (0.7) per square mile. Roughly half of the ROI’s 

estimated 6,027 residents live in the two county seats, Van Horn (Culberson County) and Sierra 

Blanca (Hudspeth County). 

3.9.4.3 Housing 

The number of housing units in the ROI was 2,792 in 2000, with 2,144 units occupied. (USCB 

2000a; TTNUS 2005) There were a total of 648 vacant housing units in the ROI in 2000. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-38

(USCB 2000a; TTNUS 2005) Of the 269 vacant units in Culberson County, 4.8 percent were for 

sale, 10.4 percent were for rent, and 32.3 percent were for seasonal, recreation, or occasional use. 

(USCB 2000a) Of the 379 vacant units in Hudspeth County, 8.2 percent were for sale, 12.7 

percent were for rent, and 24.8 percent were for seasonal, recreation, or occasional use. (USCB 

2000a) In 2000, the homeowner vacancy rate in the ROI ranged from 1.7 percent in Culberson 

County to 3.4 percent in Hudspeth County, while the rental vacancy rate ranged from 8.4 percent 

in Culberson County to 18.8 percent in Hudspeth County. (USCB 2000a) Culberson County’s 

vacancy rates were comparable to the State of Texas rates of 1.8 percent homeowner vacancy 

and 8.5 percent rental vacancy. (USCB 2000a) Hudspeth County’s rates were significantly 

higher. 

3.9.4.4 Community Services 

Schools 

There are three school districts in the ROI serving 890 students. The Culberson CountyAllamoore Independent School District has three schools to serve 620 students. The Dell City 

Independent School District has one school to serve 133 students. The Sierra Blanca 

Independent School District has one school to serve 137 students. (TEA 2004) 

Medical Facilities 

The ROI is served by the Culberson County Hospital District in Van Horn. The hospital has 14 

beds, one full-time physician, one full-time physician’s assistant, five to six registered nurses, 

and seven to ten licensed practical nurses. (Bates 2005) The hospital does not have surgical or 

obstetrics capabilities. Most residents travel to hospitals outside of the ROI for these services, 

usually to hospitals in El Paso, Texas. Other hospitals just outside of the ROI include (CityData.Com Undated). 

• Reeves County Hospital (Pecos, Texas) 

• Carlsbad Medical Center (Carlsbad, New Mexico) 

• Big Bend Regional Medical Center Home Health (Alpine, Texas) 

Natural Resources and Energy Supply 

The existing energy demands at the proposed site are met by the intermittent use of a diesel 

power generator. The current activities at the site do not require the use of water supplies. 

3.10 Traffic and Transportation 

3.10.1 Definition of Resource 

Transportation as a resource relates to the manner in which goods, equipment, and people move 

to and from an area of interest. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-39

3.10.2 Regulatory Setting 

The DOT regulates transport of hazardous materials in 49 CFR Parts 171-179; however, there 

are no regulations affecting traffic other than local and state ordinances restricting speed and 

other vehicle operation parameters. 

3.10.3 Region of Influence 

The ROI for transportation includes Corn Ranch, the proposed launch site, and Texas Highway 

54, the two-lane paved road that services both areas. Most goods, equipment, and people move 

to and from the area of the proposed launch site by road. 

3.10.4 Existing Conditions 

The proposed launch site is approximately 40 air kilometers (25 air miles) and 48 road 

kilometers (30 road miles) north of Van Horn. Access to the proposed launch site is from Texas 

Highway 54, which is approximately eight kilometers (five miles) west of the proposed project’s 

center of operations. As depicted in Exhibit 1-1, Highway 54 runs north and south between 

Interstate Highway 10 to the south and U.S. Highways 62/180 to the north. Highway 54 is a 

two-lane, paved road with occasional driveway entrances to ranches, but no crossroads in the 

vicinity of the project. 

Union Pacific operates a major rail line from El Paso to Dallas, approximately 40 kilometers (25 

miles) to the south of the proposed site, running approximately parallel to I-10 and passing 

through Van Horn. El Paso, which is 193 kilometers (120 miles) west of Van Horn, is a hub for 

Union Pacific. There is a rail yard at Sierra Blanca, 105 kilometers (65 miles) west of Van Horn. 

Sierra Blanca is the location of the joining of the second intercontinental railroad in 1881. Sierra 

Blanca also has a junction with another Union Pacific line that runs to San Antonio, roughly 

paralleling Interstate 20. The nearest major air service is at El Paso International Airport, which 

serves several national and international passenger airlines and cargo carriers. There is a small 

county airport in Van Horn. 

Traffic on Highway 54 is extremely light. In a recent (2004) traffic survey conducted by the 

Texas DOT, 180 vehicles per day passed a counting location on Highway 54 approximately 48 

kilometers (30 miles) north of Van Horn. (Czerniak 2005) This equates to 7.5 vehicles per hour 

or one vehicle every eight minutes. Although a Level-of-Service analysis has not been 

performed, clearly traffic on Highway 54 can be characterized as free flow or Class A as defined 

by the National Research Council. (NRC 1985) No traffic noise measurements have been 

performed; however, the noise is typical of a remote setting with infrequent traffic (see Section 

3.7). There is no traffic accident data for this highway, but given the infrequent traffic, the rate 

would be very small. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-40

3.11 Water Resources (including Wetlands and Wild and Scenic Rivers) 

3.11.1 Definition of Resource 

The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) defines major aquifers as those supplying large 

quantities of water in large areas of the state; minor aquifers typically supply large quantities of 

water in small areas or relatively small quantities in large areas. 

3.11.2 Regulatory Setting 

Drinking water quality, in this case ground water is regulated by the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality. The standards promulgated by this commission are written to comply 

with the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act and U.S. EPA’s Primary Drinking Water Regulations. 

Property owners in Texas have the right to capture or use the ground water beneath their property 

(rule of capture), regardless of the effects on neighboring wells. 

3.11.3 Region of Influence 

The boundary of the underlying ground water body, the Wild Horse Flat of the West Texas 

Bolsons, defines the region of influence. The boundaries of this flat, shown in Exhibit 3-14, lie 

within Culberson County, Texas. 

3.11.4 Existing Condition 

3.11.4.1 Wetlands 

There are no permanent, naturally occurring surface waters or open freshwater systems, or 

federally protected wetlands, as defined by section 404 of the Clean Water Act, on the proposed 

site. As a result, jurisdictional wetlands would not be affected by the proposed activities. 

3.11.4.2 Wild and Scenic Rivers 

The only river in Texas designated by the National Park Service as a wild and scenic river is a 

307-kilometer (191-mile) stretch of the United States side of the Rio Grande River along the 

Mexican border beginning in Big Bend National Park. This wild and scenic river is not in the 

ROI for this project; therefore, impacts to the river are not considered in this EA. 

3.11.4.3 Aquifers 

There are no major aquifers within approximately 80 kilometers (50 miles) of the proposed Blue 

Origin site. The site does lie over a minor aquifer, referred to as the West Texas Bolsons. 

(Ashworth and Hopkins 1995) 

The West Texas Bolsons include several deep basins filled with erosional sediments of 

Quaternary and Tertiary age that contain variable quantities of ground water. These filled basins, 

or bolsons, include Red Light Draw, Eagle Flat, Green River Valley, Presidio-Redford, and Salt 

Basin. The easternmost basin, which is approximately 225 kilometers (140 miles) long and 40 

kilometers (25 miles) across at its widest point, is the Salt Basin, which can be further subdivided 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-41

into four aquifer sub-basins; Wild Horse, Michigan, Lobo, and Ryan Flats (Exhibit 3-14). 

(Ashworth and Hopkins 1995) Ground water from the Salt Basin Bolson aquifer is the primary 

source of water supply where the aquifer exists. It provides the water supply for the 

communities of Van Horn, Sierra Blanca (purchased from Van Horn), and Valentine. The 

Exhibit 3-14. Ground Water Hydrology 

Note: Aquifer locations are estimates and can vary; actual locations are determined by individual well testing. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-42

northern portion of the Salt Basin (north of Wild Horse Flats) is referred to as the Salt Flats and 

contains significantly more brackish to saline ground water than the portions to the south. (Beach 

et al. 2004) 

The proposed site is located in the Salt Basin near the northern portion of Wild Horse Flat, in 

Culberson County. The site is also in the immediate vicinity of the Capitan aquifer. TWDB well 

records indicate that all of the existing water producing wells within the proposed site produce 

water from the Salt Bolson formation. Both the Salt Bolson and Capitan aquifers are discussed 

here. 

With a gross lake evaporation rate, 213 centimeters (84 inches) per year, greatly exceeding the 

annual rainfall at the site, 28 centimeters (11 inches) per year, (Larkin and Bomar 1983) no 

perennial surface water is found in the Salt Basin (Angle 2001) nor in Culberson County. 

(CCGCD 2000) Ephemeral overland flow, which can result from locally intense rainfall activity 

or rainfall in the surrounding mountains, drains toward the center of the basin. (Angle 2001) 

The Bolson sediments are on the order of 152 meters (500 feet) thick in the area of the site. 

Much of the Salt Basin Bolson to the south of Wild Horse Flat is underlain by tertiary igneous 

rocks, sometimes referred to as the Igneous Aquifer, which are in turn underlain by Cretaceous 

and Permian limestones. (Beach et al. 2004) However, the tertiary formation is absent in Wild 

Horse Flat and the Quaternary Bolson deposits are instead directly underlain by the Cretaceous 

and Permian hydrogeologic units. Exhibit 3-15 shows a geohydrologic east-west cross-section 

through Wild Horse Flat. (Beach et al. 2004) The location of the cross-section is indicated in 

Exhibit 3-15. The saturated portions of the Permian and Cretaceous limestones are sometimes 

included with the hydrologically connected basin fill under the designation of the Salt Basin 

Bolson aquifer. 

Exhibit 3-15. Geohydrologic Cross-Section 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-43

Because of the high evaporation rates and relatively low vertical hydraulic conductivity, direct 

precipitation does not result in recharge of the West Texas Bolson aquifer in areas like the 

proposed Blue Origin site, where precipitation is less than 30 centimeters (12 inches) per year. 

(Beach et al. 2004) Recharge to Wild Horse Flat occurs around the margins of the basin and 

along channels of ephemeral streams. The net aquifer recharge rate is in the range of 1 percent 

(Gates et al. 1980) to 1.2 percent (Beach et al. 2004) of total precipitation. Ground water flows 

into Wild Horse Flat from the south, i.e., from Lobo Flat. (Angle 2001) Discharge from the 

basin is through leakage to underlying formations, pumping and basin outflow to the east, i.e., to 

Michigan Flat. (Gates et al. 1980, Angle 2001) Although ground water pumping for irrigation 

accounts for the greatest withdrawals from Wild Horse Flat, it has been on the decline over the 

past 20 years. There has been an overall water level decline of approximately 9 meters (30 feet) 

in Wild Horse Flat since 1950, due to the agricultural water pumping. This decline has slowed in 

response to the decreased pumping since the mid 1980s. (Angle 2001) There are approximately 

1,365,000 acre-feet of fresh water and an additional 1,050,000 acre-feet of slightly saline water 

in Wild Horse Flat storage. Based on expected future use of the aquifer, recharge and crossformational flow rates, it is projected that the amount of water in storage will be unchanged in 

the year 2050. (CCGCD 2000) This forecast is likely to be conservative in light of recently 

completed detailed modeling of ground water availability of the Salt Basin Bolson aquifer, in 

which it is projected that Wild Horse Flat water levels will rebound by as much as 6 meters (20 

feet) by the year 2030, and then level out until the year 2050. (Beach et al. 2004) 

The average hydraulic conductivity of Bolson sediments in Wild Horse Flat is approximately 

15 feet/day, with values ranging from 5 to 33 feet/day. (Beach et al. 2004) Similar hydraulic 

properties have been found in the underlying cretaceous rocks. The recently completed ground 

water availability modeling included calibration of the model to determine hydraulic 

conductivity values in each model layer. It was found that appropriate values of horizontal and 

vertical hydraulic conductivity for Wild Horse Flat were 50 and 0.05 feet/day, respectively. The 

corresponding Cretaceous-Permian unit conductivities were 1 and 0.1 feet/day, respectively. 

(Beach et al. 2004) For 500 feet of Bolson thickness, the resulting transmissivity is 

2,500 feet2

/day. This is within the range of transmissivity estimates of up to 9,900 feet2/day. 

(Angle 2001) 

Specific yield is the ratio of the volume of water sediment or rock will yield to its volume and is 

equivalent to effective porosity for an unconfined aquifer such as the Salt Basin Bolson Aquifer 

at Wild Horse Flat. A specific yield of 0.13 was estimated for the upper part of the basin fill, but 

0.10 was estimated for the entire basin depth because deeper sediments have lower porosity. 

(Gates et al. 1980) 

The Texas Water Commission has defined aquifer water quality in terms of dissolved-solids 

concentrations: fresh (less than 1,000 milligrams per liter); slightly saline (1,000-3,000 

milligrams per liter); moderately saline (3,000-10,000 milligrams per liter); and very saline 

(10,000-35,000 milligrams per liter). (TWC 1989) Most Salt Basin Bolson Aquifer water is 

fresh. The exception to this is in Wild Horse and Michigan Flats, where slightly to moderately 

saline waters are more common. Of 189 data sampling points in the Salt Basin Bolson Aquifer, 

more than 25 percent of the water analyses had reported nitrate concentrations above the primary 

drinking water standard of 10 milligrams per liter as nitrate-nitrogen. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-44

Wells in the Wild Horse Flat and Michigan Flat area tend to have higher transmissivity values 

(i.e., produce more water) when they are completed in the underlying Cretaceous formations 

rather than solely in the basin fill. (Angle 2001) Regardless of aquifer hydraulic characteristics, 

yields in existing wells are often a factor of well construction. Wells with the highest yields are 

typically those with the longest screen interval in the area where aquifer saturated thickness is 

greatest. (Beach et al. 2004) 

The proposed Blue Origin site is located near the boundary of the Salt Basin Bolson and Capitan 

Reef aquifers where the former overlays the latter. TWDB well records indicate that all of the 

existing water-producing wells within the proposed site produce water from the Salt Bolson 

formation. It is expected that two new wells will be drilled to supply water for the proposed 

action. Based on the existing site well information and the low flow required from these new 

wells (see Section 4.11), it is expected that the latter will be finished in the Salt Bolson 

formation. However, the following brief description of the Capitan aquifer is presented in the 

event those wells are screened in the Capitan aquifer. 

The Capitan Reef aquifer is a Permian-age limestone formation. The hydraulic conductivity of 

its overlying basin fill is one to two orders of magnitude less than the underlying Capitan aquifer; 

very little water discharges from the Salt Basin to the Capitan. Because of the greater 

productivity of the Capitan aquifer, most of the water pumped from the Salt Flat area comes 

from that aquifer. (Angle, 2001) The generally eastward flowing aquifer contains moderately 

saline to brine water and is used for irrigation of salt tolerant crops. (Uliana 2001) 

Transmissivities up to 80,000 feet2

/day have been measured in the Capitan Reef aquifer. 

(Angle 2001) The average transmissivity of the Capitan is approximately 20,000 feet2

/day 

(Ridgeway et al. 2005) with a specific yield of approximately 0.1. (Finch and Armour 2001) 

Water from eight existing wells on and in the immediate vicinity of the proposed Blue Origin site 

was analyzed to characterize site specific ground water quantity and quality. An additional four 

wells (numbers 1, 2, 3, and 5 of Exhibit 3-16) were investigated but were dry and were not 

assessed further. All of the wells with water were finished in the Quaternary deposits of the Salt 

Basin Bolson aquifer. Installed well depths ranged from 40 to 92 meters (130 to 302 feet). 

Depths to the water table were mostly in the range of 25 to 40 meters (82 to 130 feet), with the 

water table reported at 73 meters (238 feet) at one well (number 4 of Exhibit 3-16) and 183 

meters (600 feet) at another (number 7 of Exhibit 3-16). Depths to the water table in 1950 were 

available at wells number 6 and number 9. The elevation of the water table had decreased 4 and 

5 meters (14 and 17 feet), respectively, in these two wells from 1950 to 2005. Measured flow 

rates in the eight assessed wells ranged from less than 4 to 227 liters per minute (1 to 60 gallons 

per minute). 

Water from each of the eight capable wells was sampled in January 2005 for a suite of water 

quality parameters. It should be noted that only two of the wells (number 8 and number 10 of 

Exhibit 3-16) were maintained and in use. Total dissolved solids concentrations indicated water 

that was slightly saline at five of the wells, moderately saline at two of the wells (number 4 and 

number 6), and very saline at well number 16. Exhibit 3-17 reports the range of sampled 

parameters and comparisons with Texas Water Quality standards for public water systems. 

(TCEQ 2004) Water from well number 10 was slightly saline (1,370 milligrams per liter) but 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-45

otherwise was within all water quality standards. Wells number 7, number 8, and number 9 were 

also slightly saline and exceeded only “three, two, and one, respectively,” additional secondary 

and/or action levels. 

Exhibit 3-16. Well Locations Map 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-46

Exhibit 3-17. Ground Water Quality at Site Water Wells 

Parameter 

Measurement 

Range 

(milligrams/liter) 

Texas Water 

Quality Standard 

(TCEQ 2004) 

(milligrams/liter) 

Number of wells 

within standard 

(of 8 tested) 

Total Coliform All Detected (a) (a) 

Fecal Coliform ND-Detected ND 7 

Total Dissolved 

Solids 1340-16300 1000b

 0 

Gross Alpha Particles 5.31-50.4 15c 5 

Gross Beta Particles 9.07-159 50c 7 

Nitrates ND-26.5 10 7 

Aluminum ND-6.02 0.2b 7 

Arsenic ND-0.007 0.05 8 

Barium ND-0.02 2 8 

Calcium 42.1-592 NE NE 

Chromium All ND 0.1 8 

Copper ND-0.23 1.3d 8 

Iron 0.14-59.1 0.3b 2 

Lead ND-0.27 0.015d 5 

Magnesium 34.1-828 NE NE 

Manganese ND-2.57 0.05b 4 

Nickel All ND 0.1 8 

Silver All ND 0.1b 8 

Sodium 4.7-3910 NE NE 

Beryllium All ND 0.004 8 

Zinc 0.04-22.5 5b 7 

Total Hardness 618-4890 NE NE 

a No more than one positive sample per month if fewer than 40 samples per month are taken; only one 

sample taken in 6 of the 8 wells b

 Secondary standard; water exceeding this standard can be used (with written approval from the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality) until such time as water can be supplied meeting this standard 

at a reasonable cost c

 Units of picocuries per liter 

d

 Action level; actions for small water systems could include further monitoring and public notification

ND = none detected 

NE = no established standards
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-47

3.12 Airspace 

3.12.1 Definition of Resource 

Airspace is the defined space above a nation that is under its legal control. Airspace is limited 

horizontally, vertically, and temporally. The FAA designs and manages the national airspace 

based on guidelines from the Federal Aviation Regulations. The FAA has developed specific 

classifications for airspace to establish limits on its use. These classifications include Controlled, 

Uncontrolled, and Special Use airspace; military training routes; en route airways and jet routes; 

airports and airfields; and air traffic control. The types of airspace are dictated by the number 

and type of aircraft that are predicted to use the airspace, the nature of the operations conducted 

within the airspace, the required level of safety, and the level of national and public interest in 

the airspace. The FAA manages commercial and general aviation activity within the airspace 

and the military, with FAA oversight, manages military aviation activity within Special Use and 

Other airspace. 

3.12.2 Regulatory Setting 

Use of the airspace above the potential launch site is regulated by the Federal Aviation 

Administration pursuant to its regulations at 14 CFR§71. 

3.12.3 Region of Influence 

The ROI is defined as the airspace within a 7.4-kilometer (4-nautical mile) radius of the 

proposed launch site, which extends outside of Blue Origin’s property in all directions (see 

Exhibit 3-18). 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-48

Exhibit 3-18. Airspace Usage 

Adopted from El Paso Sectional Aeronautical Chart (75th Edition, 4 August 2005) (NACO 2005)

3.12.4 Existing Conditions 

Air traffic within a 7.4-kilometer (4-nautical mile) radius of the test pad has been examined using 

data provided by FAA Air Traffic Control. During the period December 12, 2005 through 

December 16, 2005, aircraft tracks through this airspace ranged from 102 to 129 per day. The 

majority of these aircraft, 92 to 122 per day, were non-military. The Department of Defense 

currently notes two low-level training routes that pass within a 7.4-kilometer (4-nautical mile) 

distance of the proposed launch site, 1R 102 and 1R 194. Commercial air-route V-198 also 

passes within a 7.4-kilometer (4-nautical mile) radius of the proposed launch site. 

3.13 Environmental Justice 

3.13.1 Definition of Resource 

Environmental justice has been defined as the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all 

people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, 

31°30’ 

Approximate 7.4-kilometer 

(4-nautical mile) radius shown around 

center of proposed launch site 

31°20’ 

10 nmi 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-49

implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. (EPA 2002) 

Concern that minority and/or low-income populations might be bearing a disproportionate share 

of adverse health and environmental impacts led President Clinton to issue an Executive Order 

(EO) in 1994 to address these issues. That Order, EO 12898, “Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” directs Federal 

agencies to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as 

appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their 

programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations. The 

Presidential Memorandum that accompanied EO 12898 emphasized the importance of using 

existing laws, including NEPA, to identify and address environmental justice concerns, 

“including human health, economic, and social effects, of Federal actions.” When conducting 

NEPA evaluations, FAA incorporated environmental justice considerations into both its 

technical analyses and its public involvement program in accordance with U.S. EPA and CEQ 

regulations. 

3.13.2 Regulatory Setting 

The CEQ, which oversees the Federal government’s compliance with EO 12898 and NEPA, 

subsequently developed guidelines to assist Federal agencies in incorporating the goals of 

EO 12898 in the NEPA process. This guidance, published in 1997, was intended to “...assist 

Federal agencies with their NEPA procedures so that environmental justice concerns are 

effectively identified and addressed.” The 1997 CEQ guidance does not provide a standard 

approach or formula for identifying and addressing environmental justice issues. Instead, it 

offers Federal agencies general principles for conducting an environmental analysis under 

NEPA. 

• Federal agencies should consider the population structure in the ROI to determine whether 

minority populations, low-income populations, or Indian tribes are present, and if so, whether 

there may be disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on 

any of these groups. 

• Federal agencies should consider relevant public health and industry data concerning the 

potential for multiple or cumulative exposure to human health or environmental hazards in 

the affected population and historical patterns of exposure to environmental hazards, to the 

extent such information is available. 

• Federal agencies should recognize the interrelated cultural social, occupational, historical, or 

economic factors that may amplify the effects of the proposed agency action. These would 

include the physical sensitivity of the community or population to particular impacts. 

• Federal agencies should develop effective public participation strategies that seek to 

overcome linguistic, cultural, institutional, and geographic barriers to meaningful 

participation, and should incorporate active outreach to affected groups. 

• Federal agencies should assure meaningful community representation in the process, 

recognizing that diverse constituencies may be present. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-50

• Federal agencies should seek tribal representation in the process in a manner that is 

consistent with the government-to-government relationship between the U.S. and tribal 

governments, the Federal government’s trust responsibility to federally-recognized tribes, 

and any treaty rights. 

3.13.3 Region of Influence 

The ROI for environmental justice consists of the census tracts surrounding the launch site. 

These census tracts were targeted because they capture any potential impacts caused by the 

major resource areas/disciplines of the project including geology and soils, water, air quality, 

biological, cultural, land use and recreation, transportation, visual, noise, socioeconomics, health 

and safety, and waste management during both the construction and operations phases of the 

proposed action. The socioeconomic ROI is the largest and, therefore, bounding ROI. 

Additionally, because of the large concentration of Hispanic and Latino populations in the 

region, Culberson and Hudspeth Counties were chosen as the geographic areas of comparison for 

this analysis. Using the entire state of Texas would serve to artificially inflate the minority 

populations in the targeted census tracts. 

3.13.4 Existing Conditions 

3.13.4.1 Minority Populations 

For the purpose of this evaluation, minority refers to people who classified themselves in the 

2000 U.S. Census Bureau (USCB) as Black or African American, Asian or Pacific Islander, 

American Indian or Alaskan Native, Hispanic of any race or origin, or other non-White races. 

(CEQ 1997) The CEQ identifies these groups as minority populations when either (1) the 

minority population of the affected area exceeds 50 percent or (2) the minority population 

percentage in the affected area is meaningfully greater than the minority population percentage 

in the general population or appropriate unit of geographical analysis. 

Demographic information from the USCB was used to identify minority populations in the 

region of influence. Information on locations and numbers of minority populations was obtained 

from the 2000 U.S. Census. Census data is reported on the level of census tracts, a geographical 

area that varies with size depending largely on population density (low-population density census 

tracts generally cover larger geographical areas). 

As shown in Exhibit 3-19, for Culberson County, the aggregate of minority races is 31.1 percent. 

Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin (ethnicity) accounted for 72.2 percent of the total County 

population (see table footnote). White persons accounted for 68.9 percent of the total County 

population. None of the 2000 minority populations for the two census tracts are meaningfully 

greater than the corresponding minority population in Culberson County. Census Tract 9502’s 

Hispanic ethnicity population does exceed 50 percent of the total Census Tract 9502 population. 

However, the concentration of the Hispanic population in Census Tract 9502 is similar to that of 

Culberson County. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-51

Exhibit 3-19. Census 2000 Racial and Ethnic Characteristics 

Race Culberson 

County 

Census 

Tract 

9501 

Census 

Tract 

9502 

Hudspeth 

County 

Census 

Tract 

9501 

Census 

Tract 

9502 

Total Population, 2000 2,975 330 2,645 3,344 2,572 772 

White – alone 68.9% 90.6% 66.2% 87.2% 87.1% 87.8% 

Black or African 

American – alone 0.7% 0.9% 0.7% 0.3% 0.4% 0.0% 

American Indian or 

Alaska Native – alone 0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.4% 0.9% 3.0% 

Asian – alone 0.6% 0.9% 0.5% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 

Native Hawaiian or 

Other Pacific Islander 

– alone 

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 

Some other race alone 27.1% 5.2% 29.9% 8.8% 10.0% 4.7% 

Two or more races 2.2% 2.4% 2.2% 2.1% 1.4% 4.4% 

Aggregate minority 

population 31.1% 9.4% 33.8% 12.8% 12.9% 12.2% 

Hispanic – of any racea 72.2% 30.9% 77.4% 75% 78.8% 62.3% 

Source: USCB 2000b 

a

The USCB complies with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) standards for maintaining, collecting, and 

presenting data on race, which were revised in October 1997. They generally reflect a social definition of race 

recognized in this country. They do not conform to any biological, anthropological or genetic criteria. In accordance 

with the OMB definition of ethnicity, the USCB provides data for the basic categories in the OMB standards: 

Hispanic or Latino and Not Hispanic or Latino. In general, the USCB defines ethnicity or origin as the heritage, 

nationality group, lineage, or country of birth of the person or the person's parents or ancestors before their arrival in 

the United States. People who identify their origin as Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino may be of any race. According to 

the revised OMB standards noted above, race is considered a separate concept from Hispanic origin (ethnicity).

As shown in Exhibit 3-19, for Hudspeth County, the aggregate of minority races is 12.8 percent. 

Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin (ethnicity) accounted for 75 percent of the total County 

population (see table footnote). White persons accounted for 87.2 percent of the total County 

population. None of the 2000 minority populations for the two census tracts in Hudspeth County 

are meaningfully greater than the corresponding minority population in Hudspeth County. The 

Hispanic ethnicity populations in Census Tracts 9501 and 9502 do exceed 50 percent of the total 

populations for those census tracts. However, the concentrations of the Hispanic populations in 

these census tracts are similar to the concentration of the Hispanic population in Hudspeth 

County. 

3.13.4.2 Low-Income Populations

Environmental justice guidance defines low-income using statistical poverty thresholds used by 

the USCB. USCB low-income households in each census tract were divided by the total 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-52

households for that tract to obtain the percentage of low-income households per tract. Exhibit 

3-20 identifies the low-income census tracts in the region of interest. As shown in Exhibit 3-20, 

25.5 percent of households are below the poverty level in Culberson County and 32.9 percent of 

households in Hudspeth County are below the poverty level. 

Exhibit 3-20. Percent of Households below Poverty Level 

Race Culberson 

County 

Census 

Tract 

9501 

Census 

Tract 

9502 

Hudspeth 

County 

Census 

Tract 

9501 

Census 

Tract 

9502 

Number of 

Households 1,060 142 142 1,100 810 290 

Percent of 

households 

below the 

poverty level 

25.5% 7.7% 7.7% 32.9% 38.3% 17.9% 

Source: USCB 2000c 

None of the census tracts in the study area meets the two CEQ criteria for identification. The percentages of lowincome households in the two census tracts do not exceed 50 percent of their total household populations, and their 

percentages are not meaningfully greater than the corresponding percentages for low-income households in Culberson 

and Hudspeth Counties.

3.13.4.3 Migrant Workers and Transient Populations 

Farming (18.5 percent); retail trade (13.5 percent); and services (10.7 percent) are the major 

employment sectors in the ROI, accounting for over 42 percent of all jobs. While actual 

numbers are difficult to obtain because of the nature of transient populations, it is assumed that 

the migrant farm and service worker population may also be large. Additionally, it is estimated 

that a large percentage of the farm and service worker population migrates in from Mexico. 

3.14 Health and Safety 

3.14.1 Definition of Resource 

Health and safety includes consideration of any activities, occurrences, or operations that have 

the potential to affect the well being, safety, or health of workers or members of the general 

public. Overall public health and safety is controlled by a host of legislation that regulates 

transportation of hazardous cargo, provides for the protection of workers in the work place, 

protects the public from exposure to hazardous materials, and provides for emergency 

preparedness. 

3.14.2 Regulatory Setting 

OSHA regulations and NASA Safety Program requirements are applicable as well as the FAA 

regulations at 14 CFR Parts 400-450. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-53

3.14.3 Region of Influence 

The Health and Safety ROI includes all persons who could potentially be affected by activities at 

the launch site. This includes both site workers and members of the public traveling along State 

Highway 54. 

3.14.4 Existing Conditions 

There is one employee currently assigned to the proposed Blue Origin site. Current activities at 

the proposed launch site require very limited use of hazardous materials (fuel for portable 

generator) or waste management. There is currently no hazardous waste or wastewater 

generation. Therefore, there are no safety and health risks to workers or members of the public 

associated with the proposed Blue Origin site. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-54

3.15 References 

Angle, E. S. 2001. Hydrogeology of the Salt Basin,” Chapter 17 of Aquifers of West Texas, 

Texas Water Development Board Report 356, December 2001, found on the internet at: 

http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/GroundWaterReports/GWReports/Indivi

dual%20Report%20htm%20files/Report%20356.htm 

Ashworth and Hopkins. 1995. Major and Minor Aquifers of Texas, Texas Water Development 

Board Report 345, November 1995, found on the internet at: 

http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/GroundWaterReports/GWReports/Indivi

dual%20Report%20htm%20files/Report%20345.htm

Barnes, V. E. 1979. Marfa Sheet: The University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Economic 

Geology, Geologic Atlas of Texas, scale 1:250,000 

Bates, L. 2005. Personal Communication with E. N. Hill, Tetra Tech NUS, Culberson County 

Hospital District Data. Culberson County Hospital District. August 18 

BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis). 2005. CA25N – Total full-time and part-time 

employment by industry. Available online at http://www.bea.gov/. Accessed 

May 9, 2005 

BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis). 2005. CA05N – Personal income by major source and 

earnings by industry. Available online at http://www.bea.gov/. Accessed May 9, 2005 

Beach, J. A., et al. 2004. Groundwater Availability Model for the Igneous and parts of the West 

Texas Bolsons (Wild Horse Flat, Michigan Flat, Ryan Flat and Lobo Flat) Aquifers, June 

2004, found on the internet at: http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/gwrd/GAM/bol_ig/bol_ig.htm

Biota Information System of New Mexico (BISON). 2005a. Northern Aplomado Falcon: Falco 

femoralis septentrionalis. Species Account 040380. Available online at 

http://nmnhp.unm.edu/bisonm/bisonquery.php 

BISON. 2005b. Texas Horned Lizard: Phrynosoma cornutum. Species Account 030070. 

Available online at http://nmnhp.unm.edu/bisonm/bisonquery.php

BISON. 2005c. Mountain Short-horned Lizard: Phrynosoma hernandesi hernandesi. Species 

Account 030090. Available online at http://nmnhp.unm.edu/bisonm/bisonquery.php 

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). 2005. Local Area Unemployment Statistics. Available online 

at http://www.data.bls.gov/. Accessed May 9, 2005 

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). 1997. Environmental Justice Guidance Under the 

National Environmental Policy Act. Executive Office of the President. Washington, DC. 

December 10 

City-Data.Com. Undated. Van Horn, Texas. Available online at http://www.city-data.com/. 

Accessed May 11, 2005 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-55

Culberson County Groundwater Conservation District (CCGCD). 2000. CCGCD Management 

Plan April 19, 2000 - April 18, 2010, April 2000 

Czerniak, J. 2005. Personal communication with P. R. Moore, Tetra Tech NUS. Texas Dept. of 

Transportation, El Paso District. October 20 

Dick-Peddie, W.A. 1993. New Mexico Vegetation; Past, Present and Future. University of 

New Mexico Press: Albuquerque, New Mexico 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1974. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise 

Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. 

Office of Noise Abatement and Control, Washington, DC. March 

Federal Aviation Administration. 2001. Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for 

Licensing Launches. Office of the Associate Administrator for Commercial Space 

Transportation 

Federal Aviation Administration. 2002. Final Environmental Assessment for the Launch, 

Reentry and Recovery Operations at the Kistler Launch Facility, Nevada Test Site, April 

30 

Federal Aviation Administration. 2004. Final Environmental Assessment for the East Kern 

Airport District Launch Site Operator License for the Mojave Airport, February 18 

Finch and Armour, 2001. “Hydrogeologic Analysis and Ground-Water Flow Model of the Wild 

Horse Flat Area, Culberson County, Texas,” John Shomaker and Associates, Inc., 

August. Available at http://www.partnershipfortheenvironment.org/pictures/ACF57E.pdf

Gates, J. S., D. E. White, W. D. Stanly, and H. D. Ackerson. 1980. Availability of Fresh and 

Slightly Saline Ground Water in the Basins of Westernmost Texas, Texas Department of 

Water Resources Report 256, September, 1980, found on the internet at

http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/GroundWaterReports/GWReports/Indivi

dual%20Report%20htm%20files/Report%20256.htm

Geo-Marine Inc. 2005. Cultural Resources Survey of the Proposed Blue Origin Launch Facility 

Project Area, Culberson County, Texas. Prepared by Geo-Marine Inc., El Paso, Texas. 

Miscellaneous Reports of Investigations Number 342. August. 

Heidorn, Keith C. 2002. Weather Almanac for June 2002 - Dust in the wind. Available at 

http://www.islandnet.com/~see/weather/almanac/arc2002/alm02jun.htm 

Hendricks, R., and J. L.Thomas. 2004. Ethnographic Literature Review and Assessment, 

Carlsbad Caverns National Park. National Park Service, Cooperative Ecosystems 

Studies Unit. New Mexico State University, Department of Sociology and 

Anthropology, Las Cruces, New Mexico. May. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-56

Larkin, T. J., and G. W. Bomar. 1983. Climatic Atlas of Texas, Texas Department of Water 

Resources, LP-192, December 1983, found on the internet at 

http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/GroundWaterReports/LimitedPublicatio

ns/LP192.pdf

National Aeronautical Charting Office (NACO). 2005). El Paso Sectional Aeronautical Chart, 

75th Edition, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, 

August 4. 

National Climatic Data Center. 2005. Culberson County, Texas Storm Events. Available at 

http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-win/wwcgi.dll?wwevent~storms 

National Park Service (NPS). 2005. Air Resources Information System (ARIS). Available at 

http://www2.nature.nps.gov/air/permits/ARIS/index.cfm 

National Research Council (NRC). 1985. Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209. 

Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. 

National Weather Service. 2005a. Midland/Odessa, Texas Regional Climate Narrative. 

Midland/Odessa Weather Forecast Office, Midland Texas. Available at 

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/maf/HTML/climate.html 

National Weather Service. 2005b. Van Horn, Texas Annual Climatic Means & Extremes. 

Midland/Odessa Weather Forecast Office, Midland Texas. Available at 

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/maf/Coop_Climate/annvanhorn.html

National Weather Service. 2005c. Annual Climatological Data for the years 1999 through 2004. 

Midland/Odessa Weather Forecast Office, Midland Texas. Available at 

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/maf/HTML/climate.html 

New Mexico Rare Plant Technical Council (NMRPTC). 1999. New Mexico Rare Plants, 

Eriogonum gypsophilum (Gypsum wild buckwheat). Available online at 

http://nmrareplants.unm.edu; Latest update: 11 January 2005 

Parker, P. L., and T. F. King. 1990. Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional 

Cultural Properties, National Register Bulletin, Number 38, U.S. Department of the 

Interior, National Park Service, Interagency Resources Division. 

Peterson, J. and B.R. Zimmer. 2003. Birds of the Trans Pecos. University of Texas Press, 

Austin, Texas 

Rappole, J.H. and G.W. Blacklock. 1994. Birds of Texas: a Field Guide. Texas A&M 

University Press, College Station, Texas 

Ridgeway, et al., 2005. “Diminished Spring Flows in the San Solomon Springs System, TransPecos, Texas,” Cindy Ridgeway, et al, State of Texas Grant Number WER69, Study 

Number 84312, May. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-57

Schmidly, D.J. 2004. The Mammals of Texas. University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas. 

Tetra Tech NUS. 2005. Calculation Package. Aiken, South Carolina, May. 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. 2004. Drinking Water Standards Governing 

Drinking Water Quality and Reporting Requirements for Public Water Systems, 30 TAC 

Chapter 290 Subchapter F, Water Supply Division of Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality, RG-346, Revised February 2004, found on the internet at 

http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/comm_exec/forms_pubs/pubs/rg/rg-346_192507.pdf

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. 2005. Air Quality. Available at 

http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/nav/eq/eq_air.html

Texas Education Agency. 2004. 2003-2004 Academic Excellence Indicator System. Available 

online at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/ Accessed May 11, 2005 

Texas Environmental Profiles. Undated. County Profiles: Criteria Air Pollution, Culberson 

County. Available at http://www.texasep.org/html/cnty/prfls/cnty_prfls_54.html 

Texas 2005. Texas Parks & Wildlife Department, Texas State Park Guide 

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/parkguide, May 24. 

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) 2005a. Annotated County Lists of Rare Species; 

Culberson County. E-mail from S. Holton, TPWD, Wildlife Division, Wildlife Diversity 

Office, Austin, Texas, to M.L. Whitten, Tetra Tech NUS, Aiken, South Carolina. 

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 2005b. Endangered and Threatened Birds in Texas, 

Northern Aplomado Falcon. Available online at 

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/nature/endang/animals/birds 

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 2005c. Endangered and Threatened Birds in Texas, 

Peregrine Falcon. Available online at 

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/nature/endang/animals/birds/ 

Texas Water Commission. 1989. Ground-Water Quality of Texas – An Overview of Natural 

and Man-Affected Conditions, Texas Water Commission Report 89-01, March 1989, 

found on the internet at 

http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/GroundWaterReports/GWReports/ 

TWC%20Report%2089-01/R89-01.htm

Texas Water Development Board. 2001. Far West Texas Regional Water Plan. Available at 

http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/RWPG/main-docs/regional-plans-index.htm
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-58

Uliana, 2001. “The Geology and Hydrogeology of the Capitan Aquifer: A Brief Overview,” 

Chapter 11 of Aquifers of West Texas, Texas Water Development Board Report 356, 

December, available at 

http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/GroundWaterReports/GWReports/Repor

t%20356/Chapter11.pdf

United States Air Force (USAF) 1998. Proposed Expansion of German Air Force Operations at 

Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico. Headquarters, Air Combat Command, Langley 

Air Force Base, Virginia. 

U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). 1990. American Factfinder. DP-1. General Population and 

Housing Characteristics: 1990. Available online at http://www.factfinder.census.gov. 

Accessed May 10, 2005 

U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). 2000a. American Factfinder. GCT-H5. General Housing 

Characteristics: 2000. Available online at http://www.factfinder.census.gov. Accessed 

May 13, 2005 

U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). 2000b. American Factfinder. P3. Race [71] – Universe: Total 

Population. Hispanic or Lantino, and Not Hispanic or Latino by Race [73] – Universe: 

Total population. Available online at http://www.factfinder.census.gov. Accessed 

January 6, 2006 

U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). 2000c. American Factfinder. P92. Poverty Status in 1999 of 

Households by Household Type by Age of Householder [59] – Universe: Households. 

Available online at http://www.factfinder.census.gov. Accessed January 6, 2006 

U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). 2005. Table 1: Annual Estimates of the Population for Counties 

of Texas: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2004 (CO-EST2004-01-48). Available online at 

http://www.census.gov.popest/estimates.php. Accessed May 10, 2005 

U.S. Department of Agriculture-Soil Conservation Service. 1991. General Soil Map, Culberson 

County, Texas: US Department of Agriculture-Soil Conservation Service, scale 

1:253,440 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2002. Environmental Justice. Available on 

line at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaljustice/index.html. Accessed 

July 11, 2004 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2005. County Air Quality Report – Criteria 

Air Pollutants for the years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Available at 

http://www.epa.gov/air/data/geosel.html 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1988. Black-footed Ferret Recovery Plan. Denver, 

Colorado 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

3-59

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2005a. Southwest Region Ecological Services, 

Endangered Species Program, Endangered Species List for Culberson County, Texas. 

Available online at http://ifw2es.fws.gov/EndangeredSpecies/lists/ 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2005b. USFWS Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Establishment of a Nonessential Experimental Population of Northern 

Aplomado Falcons in New Mexico and Arizona and Availability of Draft Environmental 

Assessment. FR 70(26): 6819-6828 
 

This page intentionally left blank.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-1

4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

This chapter describes the potential environmental consequences of the proposed action and the 

no action alternative, as described in Chapter 2. The analyses are based on information from 

Chapter 2, descriptions of the existing environment in Chapter 3, and other information 

described or referenced in this chapter. Both direct and indirect impacts are considered in the 

EA. Direct impacts are those caused by the proposed action that occur at the same time and 

place (or immediately thereafter). Direct impacts of a large development project could include 

construction-related impacts such as soil erosion and disturbance of wildlife or operations-related 

impacts such as emissions of air or water pollutants. Indirect impacts are those that occur later in 

time, but are still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect impacts could include strains on infrastructure 

or public services resulting from population growth associated with a large development project. 

The safety and health of the general public could be affected by the proposed action; however, 

due to the remote location of the Culberson County, Texas launch site, the potential to affect the 

public would be limited to in-flight emergencies. The closest public area to the launch site 

activities would be more than eight kilometers (five miles) from the test pad and recovery areas. 

The FAA will consider credible accident scenarios during a RLV Systems Safety Review 

conducted by AST, as part of a licensing determination. 

4.1 Air Resources 

4.1.1 Proposed Action 

Impacts to ambient air quality would occur from the construction and operation of the proposed 

launch site. As discussed in more detail in the following paragraphs, launch site impacts on air 

resources would be de minimis. Because the proposed launch site is located in an air quality 

control region that has always been in attainment with Federal and state ambient air quality 

standards, an analysis of conformity under the CAA Section 176(c) is not required. 

4.1.1.1 Construction 

Construction activities potentially affecting air quality include the clearing of land, operation of 

heavy-duty construction equipment, the temporary operation of a cement batch plant, and on site 

vehicle travel on unsurfaced roads. Exhaust emissions from these sources would result in 

releases of the following criteria pollutants: nitrogen oxides (NOX), sulfur oxides (SOx), CO, 

particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter (PM10), and volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs). The calculation of emissions from construction equipment was based on 

emission factors provided in the U.S. EPA document AP-42, “Compilation of Air Pollutant 

Emission Factors” (EPA 1992). For highway vehicles (i.e., worker commuting vehicles and 

delivery vehicles) emission factors were obtained from the EPA Mobile Source Emission Factor 

Model, MOBILE6.2. (EPA 2002) 

Air quality analyses were also based on engineering estimates that approximately 28,428 square 

meters (306,000 square feet) of floor space would be constructed and 3 square kilometers (760 

acres) of land would be disturbed during construction. Material requirements include 

approximately 7,646 cubic meters (10,000 cubic yards) of concrete and 9,175 cubic meters 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-2

(12,000 cubic yards) of aggregate. The construction project would be completed in 

approximately 12 months based on the assumption that construction would occur with two shifts 

per day, six days per week and would involve conventional construction and earth-moving 

equipment (e.g., bulldozers, graders, excavators, dump trucks). Most land clearing and soil 

transfer operations would take place during the first six months of the construction project (see 

Exhibit 4-1). 

Exhibit 4-1. Construction Equipment On site by Type and Number per Month 

Equipment Rated 

HP Construction Month 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Bulldozers 155 2 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Excavators/Trench 

Machines 145 2 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Road Graders 147 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 

Front-end 

loaders/backhoes 115 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 

Dump Trucks 250 5 10 10 10 5 5 2 2 2 2 1 1 

Rollers 130 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 

Water Trucks 250 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 

Compactors 145 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Concrete Trucks 250 0 5 5 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Utility Trucks-1/2 

Ton 200 5 10 10 10 10 5 5 5 11 11 11 11

Utility Trucks-1 

Ton 225 5 5 10 10 10 5 5 5 2 2 0 0 

Utility Crane-5 

Ton 194 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 

Forklifts 130 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

Man-lifts 80 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 1 0 0 

Note: Assumed fork lifts and man lifts operated 6 hours per day. Assumed all other equipment operated 10 hours 

per day. To calculate total number of hours each equipment type would operate, per month multiply table value by 

144 (forklifts/manlifts) or 240 (all other equipment). 

Fugitive dust generated during land clearing and soil transfer operations is dependent on a 

number of factors including silt and moisture content of the soil, wind speed, and area disturbed. 

A common procedure to estimate emissions from an entire construction project is to use the EPA 

emission factor of 1.2 tons per acre per month of activity. (EPA 1992) This emission factor 

represents total suspended particulates (i.e., particles less than 30 microns in diameter). A 

multiplication factor of 0.75 was used to correct the emission rate to one for PM10. (EPA 1992) It 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-3

was also assumed that water would be applied to disturbed areas. This would reduce emissions 

by about 50 percent. Facility construction could include a concrete batch plant at the project site. 

Particulate matter consisting primarily of cement dust would be the only regulated pollutant 

emitted in the concrete mixing process. The cement batch plant would incorporate particulate 

control techniques such as the enclosure of conveyors and elevators, filters on storage bin vents, 

and the use of water sprays. Emission factors for the concrete batch plant were obtained from 

AP-42. (EPA 1992) 

The estimated maximum annual pollutant emissions resulting from construction activities are 

presented in Exhibit 4-2. Actual construction emissions are expected to be less, because 

conservative emission factors and other conservative assumptions were used in the modeling of 

construction activities and tend to overestimate impacts. To estimate the impact to the local air 

quality, Exhibit 4-3 provides a comparison of anticipated emissions from construction activities 

to baseline emissions from Culberson County. 

The maximum concentrations of pollutants at the launch site property line that would be 

associated with construction activities were estimated using EPA’s SCREEN3 model. (EPA 

1995) As shown in Exhibit 4-4, the estimated increases in ambient background concentrations 

due to proposed construction activities would be less than NAAQS. Impacts are expected to be 

localized and short-term. 

Exhibit 4-2. Estimated Maximum Annual Emissions of Criteria Pollutants from 

Construction at the Launch Site 

Source 

PM10

(tons) 

SO2

(tons) 

CO 

(tons) 

NO2

(tons) 

VOCa

(tons) 

Site Preparation 342 --- --- --- --- 

Concrete Batch 

Plant 0.09 --- --- --- --- 

Equipment Engines 6.35 2.44 29.04 130.06 7.63 

Aggregate Transfer 0.04 --- --- --- --- 

Personal Vehicles 0.02 0.004 7.56 0.88 0.54 

Total 348.50 2.44 36.60 130.94 8.18 

a

 VOCs contribute to the formation of ground level O3
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-4

Exhibit 4-3. Comparison of Maximum Annual Emissions from Construction to 

Culberson County Baseline Conditions 

Source 

PM10

(tons) 

SO2

(tons) 

CO 

(tons) 

NO2

(tons) 

VOCa

(tons) 

Site construction 348.50 2.44 36.60 130.94 8.18 

Culberson County 

Baseline 990 57.48 5120.14 2275.4 716.67 

Net Increase Over 

Baseline (%) 

35.2% 4.2% 0.7% 5.8% 1.10% 

a VOCs contribute to the formation of ground level O3

Exhibit 4-4. Comparison of Predicted Maximum Downwind Concentrations Due to 

Construction Activities to NAAQS 

Pollutant Averaging 

Time 

NAAQSa 

(μg/m3) 

Maximum 

Incremental 

Concentration 

Increase b

(μg/m3) 

Incremental 

Concentration 

Increase as Percent of 

NAAQS (percent) 

CO 8-hour 10,000 0.04 0.00040 

1-hour 40,000 0.05 0.00013 

NOX Annual 100 0.01 0.01 

Annual 80 0.05 0.06 

SOx 24-hour 365 0.25 0.07 

3-hour 1,300 0.56 0.04 

Annual 50 0.07 0.14 

PM10 24-hour 150 0.35 0.23 

a

 The more stringent of the Federal and state standards is presented if both exist for the averaging period. b

 Increase in ambient air concentrations estimated using EPA’s SCREEN3 model

4.1.1.2 Operation 

Lower Atmosphere 

Operational emissions would result from use of personal vehicles to access the site and diesel 

generators that provide electric power for the launch site, as well as from the launch vehicle 

during liftoff. In the first five months of operation, the diesel generators might be used to 

provide 750 kilowatts of sustained electric power during day-to-day operations and 1.2 

megawatts of electric power during launch operations (5 launches-10 hours per day). During 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-5

non-working hours the generators might provide 100 kilowatts of electric power. At some point 

during and after the first five months of operation the generators would be used for emergency 

power during launches. Performance verification testing would be conducted once per month for 

a period not to exceed 10-hours. The estimated maximum annual pollutant emissions resulting 

from normal launch activities are presented in Exhibit 4-5. The maximum concentrations of 

pollutants at the launch site property line that would be associated with these launch activities 

were estimated using EPA’s SCREEN3 model. (EPA 1995) The estimated increases in ambient 

background concentrations due to launch site operations would be negligible. Increases in 

ambient background concentrations in the Guadalupe Mountains National Park and Carlsbad 

Caverns National Park would be considerably smaller resulting in a negligible, less than 

significant impact on visibility. 

Upper Atmosphere 

The propellants that would be used for launches at the proposed launch site include hydrogen 

peroxide and kerosene. Using these propellants, the CO2 emissions would be the most 

significant. (FAA 2001) For an assumed 52 launches per year in 2010, a total of 1,060 tons of 

CO2 would be emitted by the launch activities. From 2006-2010, a maximum of 25 test launches 

per year would be conducted, producing less than half this amount of CO2. By comparison, the 

total annual CO2 emissions from all U.S. sources for 1999 were over 5.5 billion metric tons 

(6.1 billion tons). (FAA 2001) Although CO2 emissions could affect global warming, the CO2

emissions from the proposed action would be negligible compared to the rest of the CO2

emissions sources in the U.S. These propellants do not produce O3-depleting compounds. 

Therefore, impacts to the upper atmosphere would be negligible. 

While launch vehicle emissions from operations at or above 914 meters (3,000 feet) do occur, 

these emissions would not result in appreciable ground-level concentrations. The mixing layer 

(sometimes referred to as the boundary layer) is the layer of air directly above the Earth’s surface 

that is relatively well mixed. This layer extends up to a height referred to as the mixing height, 

above which the free troposphere extends up to the tropopause. Typically, temperature and 

density decrease with altitude in the atmosphere up to the mixing height. However, at the mixing 

height, the temperature begins to increase with altitude, creating an inversion. This inversion 

prevents a parcel of air from spontaneously rising past the mixing height because its temperature 

would have to increase, requiring energy input. Furthermore, substances in the free troposphere 

above the mixing height tend to remain in the free troposphere rather than sink through the 

inversion layer into the mixing layer due to these temperature and density trends. Therefore, a 

parcel of air above the mixing height will spontaneously rise rather than fall with a decrease in 

temperature and density, which would require energy. (Visconti 2001) Pollutants released into 

the atmosphere above the mixing height will, in large part, remain above the mixing height. 

Releases of pollutants above this altitude will not result in appreciable ground-level 

concentrations of the pollutant. Accordingly, when launch vehicles reach an altitude at or above 

the mixing height, their emissions generally will have negligible effect on ground-level 

concentrations. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-6

Exhibit 4-5. Estimated Annual Emissions of Criteria Pollutants from Operation of the 

Launch Sitea, tons per year 

Source PM10 SOx CO NOX VOCb

 

PSD Significant Emissions Ratec 15 40 100 40 40 

Year 1

Launchesd --- 0.034 0.010 --- --- 

Diesel Generators 0.434 27.734 3.213 10.028 0.700 

Personal Vehicles 0.001 0.0002 0.336 0.039 0.024 

Total 0.43 27.77 3.56 10.07 0.72 

Years 2-4

Launchese --- 0.168 0.048 --- --- 

Diesel Generators 0.006 1.925 0.033 0.655 0.023 

Personal Vehicles 0.025 0.0047 8.692 1.015 0.625 

Total 0.03 2.10 8.77 1.67 0.65 

Year 5 and Beyond

Launchese --- 0.350 0.100 --- --- 

Diesel Generators 0.006 1.925 0.033 0.655 0.023 

Personal Vehicles 0.025 0.005 8.692 1.015 0.625 

Total 0.03 2.28 8.83 1.67 0.65 

a

 The use of solid rocket motors during an emergency separation would release approximately 113 kilograms (248 pounds) of 

CO, 100 kilograms (221 pounds) of HCl, 170 kilograms (375 pounds) of Al2O3 , to the atmosphere. Proposed testing of the 

emergency separation system would create estimated total emissions of less than 1,134 kilograms (2,500 pounds) of CO; 1,043 

kilograms (2,299 pounds) of HCl; and 1,700 kilograms (3,748 pounds) of Al2O3 over a one year period. Due to the 

infrequency of emergency separation or separation motor tests, the impacts of these emissions would be negligible. b

 VOCs contribute to the formation of ground level O3 c

 Source: 40CFR52.21 

d

 Assumes 5 launches in first year 

e

 Assumes 25 launches per year 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-7

As discussed in Section 2.1, solid rocket motors would be used during an emergency separation. 

The use of solid rocket motors in an emergency would result in a release of approximately 113 

kilograms (248 pounds) of CO, 100 kilograms (221 pounds) of HCl, 170 kilograms (375 pounds) 

of Al2O3, to the atmosphere. Proposed testing of the emergency separation system would result 

in estimated total emissions of less than 1,134 kilograms (2,500 pounds) of CO, 1,043 kilograms 

(2,300 pounds) of HCl, and 1,701 kilograms (3,750 pounds) of Al2O3 over a one year period. 

Due to the infrequency of emergency separation or separation motor tests, the impacts of these 

emissions would be negligible. 

As discussed in Section 3.1.2.5, climate change is a global issue with potential major long-term 

implications to global climate and ecosystems. The proposed launch site has the potential to 

contribute to global climate change effects as a result of emissions from the ground support 

operations, emissions and rocket exhaust emissions; however, the global effect would be 

negligible.

4.1.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permits or licenses would be issued and no 

construction or launch operations would be conducted. There would be no air emissions from 

launch operations. Current fugitive dust emissions would continue to occur. 

4.2 Ecological Resources 

4.2.1 Proposed Action 

The following sections provide an assessment of potential impacts to biological resources from 

the construction and operation of the proposed launch site. These potential impacts are discussed 

relative to their effects on terrestrial biota and special status species. Because there are no 

aquatic resources in the vicinity of the launch site, a discussion of impacts to aquatic biota is not 

relevant to this analysis. 

4.2.1.1 Construction 

Vegetation 

Construction activities described in Section 2.4 would result in the clearing, grading, or 

disturbance of approximately 308 hectares (760 acres), which is approximately 4.1 percent of the 

7,527 hectares (18,600 acres) contained within the launch site perimeter fence line. 

Because the proposed site receives only about 28 centimeters (11 inches) of rainfall annually 

(Culberson County Conservation Management Plan 2000), erosion and sedimentation are less of 

a concern than in less arid regions. Nevertheless, flash flooding during infrequent storms occurs 

in the region, and soil erosion caused by water movement across the cleared area could 

potentially alter vegetation communities in down gradient ephemeral drainages. Construction 

activities would be carefully planned and conducted according to best management practices to 

minimize erosion and soil loss. For example, secured haybales and/or straw wattles would be 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-8

used to trap sediment from disturbed areas to prevent off site discharge of sediment, and runoff 

retention dams and diversion berms would be constructed where applicable. 

Construction activities would impact the approximate acreages of the five vegetation 

communities at the proposed launch site as shown in Exhibit 4-6 (see Exhibit 3-3, Section 

3.2.4.1). 

Exhibit 4-6. Areas Impacted by Construction Activities 

Vegetation community Area Impacted 

Creosote bush 201 hectares (497 acres) 

Sacaton 32 hectares (79 acres) 

Grama grass 9 hectares (22 acres) 

Gypsophilic 7 hectares (17 acres) 

Arroyo riparian <0.4 hectares (<1 acre) 

The above acreages consist of impacted areas within the proposed launch site plus a corridor of 

approximately 15 meters (50 feet) adjacent to but outside the perimeter fence. In addition to the 

acreages indicated above, approximately 58 more hectares (144 acres) would also be impacted 

due to construction of access roads and rights-of-way outside the 7,527 hectares (18,600-acre) 

proposed launch site. The additional 58 hectares (144 acres) would be in creosote bush and 

sacaton vegetation communities. 

As shown above, most construction activity would be in vegetation characterized as creosote 

bush community. This community type comprises approximately 5,609 hectares (13,860 acres), 

or approximately three-fourths of the 7,527 hectares (18,600-acre) proposed launch site. The 

sacaton community encompasses approximately 1,256 hectares (3,103 acres) of the proposed 

launch site, only 32 hectares (79 acres) of which would be disturbed by construction. Likewise, 

approximately 7 of 619 hectares (17 of 1,529 acres) of gypsophilic community would be 

disturbed. Because these plant communities type are common on the launch site and throughout 

the Chihuahuan Desert in the Trans-Pecos region of Texas, the anticipated loss would represent 

only a small portion of this habitat type and would not adversely affect local or regional diversity 

of plants and plant communities. The grama grass community is somewhat less abundant on the 

site 59 hectares (145 acres), but the disturbance of 9 hectares (22 acres) of this community would 

not adversely affect local or regional diversity of this community. Similarly, the disturbance of 

less than one of two acres of pseudo arroyo riparian vegetation, which is not naturally occurring 

and is found only near former livestock ponds and tanks, would not adversely affect local or 

regional diversity of plants. 

Wildlife 

Potential construction-related impacts to wildlife could be produced by activities such as noise, 

human presence, clearing, and grading. As described in Section 3, on March 25, 2006 the FAA 

sent a letter to the USFWS regarding potential impact on threatened or endangered species from 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-9

the proposed action. In the letter the FAA determined that formal consultation under Section 7 

of the Endangered Species Act is not warranted. The FAA requested the USFWS comments 

and/or concurrence with this determination. On May 23, 2006, the FAA received a response 

from the USFWS that concurred with the FAA’s determination that it is unlikely that any 

federally listed threatened or endangered species would occur in the project area. The USFWS 

requested that the FAA review the potential for ground water development directly or indirectly 

associated with the project to impact springs in Jeff Davis and Reeves counties which host the 

federally endangered Comanche Springs pupfish and Pecos gambusia. A discussion of possible 

ground water impacts from the proposed action is included in Section 4.11 of this EA. 

Impacts to wildlife from construction at the proposed Blue Origin site would consist of removal 

of vegetation, which could lead to permanent or temporary loss of habitat and degradation of 

value of adjacent habitat due to an increase in noise and human activity. Construction activities 

such as clearing, excavating, and grading would result in impacts to wildlife through elimination 

of vegetation communities (habitats) and their associated fauna. Small numbers of less-mobile, 

burrow-dwelling animals (e.g., pocket gophers, chipmunks) inhabiting the construction area 

could be displaced by construction activity or killed if burrows are filled, crushed, or paved. 

More mobile animals such as birds and larger mammal species (e.g., rabbits, pronghorn) would 

be expected to disperse to less-disturbed areas of the proposed launch site or off site. Lizards 

and snakes are mobile, and many of these would also be expected to disperse to less disturbed 

areas of the proposed launch site or off site. 

The only construction activity proposed near either of the two prairie dog colonies (see 

Section 3.2.2.2) is the placement of a perimeter fence. The fence would be located 

approximately 183 meters (600 feet) east of the eastern edge of the northern colony, and 

approximately 518 meters (1,700 feet) west of the southern colony. The construction of the 

perimeter fence at these distances would not impact either of these colonies, nor other wildlife 

species (e.g., Western burrowing owls, badgers) that might inhabit prairie dog burrows. 

The small cave in which roosting bats have been observed (Section 3.2.2.2) is located along the 

eastern side of the gypsum/limestone ridge in the west-central portion of the launch site. The 

only construction activity proposed in the vicinity of the cave would be the construction of a road 

approximately 183 meters (600 feet) east of the ridge, and thus, the cave and associated animal 

species would not be impacted. 

As described in the previous vegetation subsection, most of the proposed construction activity 

would be in areas characterized as creosote bush community. This vegetation type is abundant 

on the proposed launch site and is not considered to be high-quality wildlife habitat. The loss of 

308 hectares (760 acres) of habitat would result in a small, less than significant impact to the 

wildlife of the proposed launch site. 

Development of the proposed launch site would result in the fencing and enclosure of 7,527 

hectares (18,600 acres) of Chihuahuan Desert Scrub vegetation. Much of the enclosed area 

would continue to provide habitat for wildlife, particularly species that are more tolerant of noise 

and human presence. However, the fenced enclosure may preclude the entry into the area of 

large animals such as pronghorn. Because the proposed launch site provides no watering holes, 

important foraging areas, or other important habitat for large mammals, the fenced enclosure 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-10

would not adversely affect large mammals in the area. Birds, reptiles, and small mammals such 

as chipmunks and mice would not be hindered by the fence. Some animals would undoubtedly 

be able to dig underneath the fence if desired (e.g., coyote, badger). Although the enclosed area 

would extend approximately 11 kilometers by 8 kilometers (7 miles by 5 miles) at its widest 

points, no migratory wildlife would be impacted, since the only migratory wildlife in the area are 

birds and bats. 

Construction activities would include excavation, digging and pouring foundations, and 

construction of buildings, roads, and utilities. These activities would involve the movement of 

workers and construction equipment and would be associated with relatively high noise levels 

from earth moving equipment, portable generators, pile driving equipment, pneumatic tools, 

drills, hammers, and the like. Although noise levels in construction areas could be high (up to 

100 dBA at 30 meters (100 feet) from sources of noise), these high local noise levels would not 

be expected to propagate far beyond the boundaries of the project site. Exhibit 4-7 illustrates the 

rapid attenuation of construction noise over relatively short distances. At 122 meters (400 feet) 

from the construction area, construction noises would range from approximately 60 to 80 dBA. 

These are below noise levels known to startle or frighten small mammals and waterfowl. 

(Golden et al. 1980) Although noise levels would be relatively low outside of the immediate 

area of construction, the combination of construction noise and human activity would be 

expected to displace small numbers of birds and small mammals that might forage, feed, nest, 

rest, or den in the area. Some animals would be driven from the area permanently, while others 

probably would become accustomed to the increased noise and activity levels and would return 

to the area. These disturbances are expected to create impacts on terrestrial mammals that would 

be small, short-term, and localized and not significant. 

Special-Status Species 

Based on habitats present at the site and on the results of biological surveys, the Northern 

aplomado falcon (federally-listed as endangered) is the only federally-listed special status 

species that may occur at the proposed launch site. The project area is located within the historic 

range of Northern aplomado falcon and is approximately 80 kilometers (50 miles) northwest of a 

site in Jeff Davis County where falcons were recently released; therefore, the species could use a 

portion of the grassland habitat at the proposed launch site. This species is typically associated 

with large Chihuahuan grassland expanses, and grasslands in the launch site are not extensive. 

Only about 59 hectares (145 acres) of the 7,527-hectare (18,600-acre) launch site are classified 

as grassland (See Exhibit 3-3, Section 3.2.4.1 and Appendix C). Because the launch site does 

not represent prime habitat for the Northern aplomado falcon, and none have been observed at 

the site, the construction of the proposed launch site would have no effect on the Northern 

aplomado falcon; a negligible impact. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-11

Exhibit 4-7. Peak and Attenuated Noise (in dBA) Levels Expected from Operation of 

Construction Equipmenta

Distance from Source 

Source 

Noise Level 

(peak) 50 feet 100 feet 200 feet 400 feet 

Heavy trucks 95 84-89 78-83 72-77 66-71 

Dump trucks 108 88 82 76 70 

Concrete mixer 105 85 79 73 67 

Jackhammer 108 88 82 76 70 

Scraper 93 80-89 74-82 68-77 60-71 

Dozer 107 87-102 81-96 75-90 69-84 

Generator 96 76 70 64 58 

Crane 104 75-88 69-82 63-76 55-70 

Loader 104 73-86 67-80 61-74 55-68 

Grader 108 88-91 82-85 76-79 70-73 

Dragline 105 85 79 73 67 

Pile driver 105 95 89 83 77 

Fork lift 100 95 89 83 77 

a

 Source: Golden et al. 1980 

No federally listed special-status species were recorded within the proposed boundaries of the 

launch site during January and April 2005 field surveys (Section 3.2.3). Although several 

special-status animal and plant species have been recorded in Culberson County (Exhibit 3-4), 

the proposed launch site does not contain suitable habitat for most of these species; therefore, 

construction of the proposed action would have no effect on federally-listed species or 

designated critical habitat. 

Twelve plant and animal species that are state-listed as threatened or endangered (but are not 

federally-listed special-status species) are found or were formerly found in Culberson County 

(see Exhibit 3-4). As discussed in Section 3.2.4.3, the proposed launch site does not contain 

suitable habitat for six of the 12 state-listed species (common black hawk, gray hawk, zone-tailed 

hawk, Pecos pupfish, Chihuahuan mud turtle, and mountain short-horned lizard), so construction 

of the proposed launch site would have no effect on these species. The black bear, state-listed as 

threatened, is occasionally found in desert lowlands in west Texas, but prefers mountainous 

forest, and bears have not been observed by Blue Origin personnel or contractors in the vicinity 

of the proposed launch site. The American peregrine falcon (state-endangered) and Arctic 

peregrine falcon (state-threatened) might pass through the vicinity of the proposed launch site 

during migration, but would not nest there (see Section 3.2.4.3). Thus, construction of the 

proposed launch site would have no impact on the black bear, the American peregrine falcon, or 

the Arctic peregrine falcon. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-12

The remaining three state-listed special status species that could potentially occur in vicinity of 

the proposed launch site are the Chihuahuan Desert lyre snake, the Texas horned lizard, and the 

Trans-Pecos black-headed snake. All three are listed by the state of Texas as threatened. 

Potential habitat for the Chihuahuan Desert lyre snake within the proposed launch site is very 

limited, and occurs along the limestone ridge bisecting the western portion of the site. No 

construction is planned for this area, and thus, the proposed action would have no effect on this 

species. The Texas horned lizard is found in a variety of habitats and could occur within the 

proposed launch site. Potential habitat for the Trans-Pecos black-headed snake at the proposed 

launch site consists of mesquite-creosote scrub. Although neither the Texas horned lizard nor 

the Trans-Pecos black-headed snake was observed during biological surveys, their existence at 

the proposed launch site cannot be ruled out. Nevertheless, construction activities would impact 

only a relatively small portion of either species’ habitat in Culberson County or the Trans-Pecos 

region, and population impacts on these two species would not be expected. 

4.2.1.2 Operation 

Vegetation 

Approximately 90 hectares (223 acres) of land would be permanently disturbed (e.g., cleared for 

a firebreak or covered with surfaces such as concrete, asphalt or other pavement) as a result of 

the proposed action. These areas would be a subset of those that were cleared for construction, 

and therefore, no additional impacts would be associated with these areas. Similarly, operational 

activities such as grounds maintenance and the use of herbicides to maintain a firebreak around 

the site perimeter would occur only in areas that were cleared during the construction phase. 

Although operational activities would be long-term, they would occur in areas that do not 

provide locally or regionally important vegetation. Therefore, associated impacts would be 

negligible, and less than significant. 

Launch and recovery operations would not affect vegetation, since launch and recovery 

operations would be conducted over concrete launch and landing pads. No high temperature 

exhaust gases would come within 80 feet of the surrounding vegetation during the nominal 

ascent or decent trajectory profile. 

Although chemicals from vehicle launch emissions can impact vegetation, significant impacts 

are not expected from proposed launch operations. The New Shepard RLV would use 

concentrated hydrogen peroxide and rocket propulsion grade kerosene as the propellants. Using 

this propellant combination, the CO2 emissions would be the most significant. (FAA 2001) 

While CO2 emissions could affect global warming, the CO2 emissions would be negligible (less 

than significant) compared to the rest of the CO2 emissions sources in the U.S. and worldwide. 

CO2 emissions would not negatively impact local vegetation. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-13

Wildlife 

Operational-related activities that could impact wildlife include launch noise, sonic booms, and 

vehicle launch emissions. 

Day-to-day operations around the launch site would not extend beyond the developed areas and 

would be expected to cause only minor disturbance to animals inhabiting the area. The duration 

and frequency of proposed vehicle landing and recovery operations are noted in Section 2.1.1 

above, and are not expected to disturb wildlife because the landing and recovery area would not 

provide suitable habitat to most species that inhabit the vicinity near the proposed launch site. 

Modeling data for noise characteristics specific to the New Shepard launch vehicle are not 

available because the vehicle design has not been finalized. As detailed in Section 4.7.1.2, noise 

from the launch vehicle is anticipated to be less than the Taurus rocket because the expected 

thrust parameters are considerably less than the Taurus rocket. Noise from Taurus launches has 

been thoroughly studied. Information presented in Section 4.7.1.2 indicates that if a Taurus 

launch were to occur at the proposed Blue Origin site, predicted launch-related noise levels 

within 9.7 to 12.9 kilometers (6 to 8 miles) would be greater than the approximately 80-85 dBA 

levels that are known to startle birds and mammals. (Golden et al 1980) The duration of launch 

noise would be approximately one minute, with the peak noise lasting from 5 to 15 seconds after 

launch. (FAA 2001; SRS Technologies 1998) Birds would be disturbed, but would be expected 

to return to the area within minutes of the launch. Monitoring studies of birds during the 

breeding season at Cape Canaveral indicate that adult birds responded to noises from Space 

Shuttle launches by flying away from the nests, but they returned within 2 to 4 minutes. (FAA 

1996) In addition, studies of birds, some within 250 meters (820 feet) of the Titan launch 

complexes at Cape Canaveral, have shown no mortality and no reductions in habitat use by 

species were related to noise from Titan launches. (FAA 1996) Similarly, launch-related noise 

for both the Space Shuttle and Titan IV launches has not had a substantial effect on wildlife on or 

near the launch complex. (FAA 1996) (Note: Titan rocket launches are associated with greater 

noise levels than Taurus rocket launches.) Based on the above information, and given the short 

duration of the launch noise, significant adverse impacts to wildlife from launch-related noise are 

not expected. As discussed in Section 4.7.1.2, landing noise is substantially less than liftoff 

noise and lasts less than 20 seconds. Thus, significant adverse impacts on wildlife from landingrelated noise are not expected. Similarly, vehicle operations are not expected to disturb wildlife 

because the landing and recovery area would not provide suitable habitat for most species that 

inhabit the region. 

Sonic booms are another potential source of launch-related noise impacts to wildlife. Section 

4.7.1.2 describes a detailed simulation of sonic booms generated during launch activity. As 

discussed in this latter section, the proposed launch trajectory would be essentially vertical, i.e., 

no pitch-over as occurs with most other types of launches. Therefore, during the ascent phase of 

a launch, the sonic boom from the vehicle would propagate away from the Earth’s surface and 

would likely not be heard, resulting in no impacts on wildlife. Nevertheless, sonic booms would 

impact the ground during landings. As further explained in Section 4.7.12, the magnitudes of 

sonic booms have been calculated using conservative assumptions. The calculations indicate 

that the loudest sonic boom would be equivalent to 90 dBA or 107 dBC and would occur along a 

circular contour approximately 1.3 kilometers (0.8 miles) from the landing pad. As mentioned in 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-14

the previous paragraph, noise levels of approximately 80-85 dBA are known to startle birds and 

mammals. (Golden, et al 1980) At approximately 4 miles from the landing pad, the sound level 

of the sonic boom would be approximately 85 dBA or 103 dBC. The sound level of the sonic 

boom would drop to 80 dBA or 100 dBC at 12.9 kilometers (8 miles) from the landing pad. 

Thus, during landing, a sonic boom could potentially startle birds and mammals up to a distance 

of 6.4 to 12.9 kilometers (4-8 miles) from the landing pad. Military aircraft from Holloman Air 

Force Base, New Mexico, and other military installations occasionally conduct low-level 

navigation flights in the vicinity of the proposed launch site. As discussed in Section 3.7.4, the 

Air Force has prepared an Environmental Impact Statement on the Holloman low-level flights, 

indicating maximum noise levels for five military aircraft types ranging from 88 to 115 dBA at 

150 meters (500 feet) altitude. (USAF 1998) The noise levels from these low-level training 

flights are similar to the above conservatively-predicted noise levels from sonic booms generated 

during landing of the launch vehicle. As discussed in the previous paragraph on launch-related 

noise, short term noise of this magnitude does not appear to significantly adversely impact 

wildlife. 

Vehicle launch emissions would probably have negligible impacts on birds, since birds would be 

frightened away by the noise of the launch, resulting in minimal contact with the exhaust plume. 

Potential impacts of the plume on mammals and reptiles are difficult to quantify, but because the 

launch facility would be a developed area that would not provide suitable habitat to most species 

that inhabit the region, few species would be in the vicinity of the launch facility. 

Blue Origin would be expected to launch approximately one weather balloon per launch, but in 

some meteorological conditions may launch more balloons for a single launch. Each balloon 

would carry a radiosonde instrument package transmitting atmospheric data as it rises. A 

radiosonde flight can last in excess of two hours, and during this time the radiosonde can ascend 

to over 35 kilometers (about 115,000 feet) and drift more than 200 kilometers (about 125 miles) 

from the release point. When the balloon has expanded beyond its elastic limit and bursts (about 

6 meters or 20 feet in diameter), a small parachute slows the descent of the radiosonde, 

minimizing the danger to lives and property. 

The U.S. Government's National Weather Service releases approximately 75,000 weather 

balloons each year. Blue Origin is expected to launch 14 to 520 balloons per year (the latter 

figure based on highly conservative estimates of 10 balloons per launch for each of 52 flights per 

year). 

As noted previously, most weather balloons burst when they reach an altitude of 8 to 32 

kilometers (5 to 20 miles) and the limits of their elasticity are reached. A small percentage of 

weather balloons return to Earth undamaged or only partially shredded and have been implicated 

in rare deaths of marine mammals, who either become entangled in the balloons or ingest their 

pieces. Research has shown that at inland sites balloons are not an environmental concern. 

(Burchette, 1989) The small percentage of balloons that do not burst into tiny pieces come down 

at less than one balloon per thirty-nine square kilometers (fifteen square miles). (Burchette 1989) 

Latex rubber balloons are highly degradable under a broad range of exposure conditions, 

including exposure to sunlight, water, and soil. Balloons degrade at about the same rate as oak 

leaves and about three times faster than small pieces of oak and pine wood. (Burchette 1989) 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-15

Therefore, weather balloons released in association with launches at the proposed Blue Origin 

launch site would have no ecological impact.

Special-Status Species 

As noted in Sections 3.2.3 and 4.2.1, no state or federally listed species was observed in surveys 

of the proposed Blue Origin site conducted in January and April 2005. Based on the habitats 

present, three state-listed species (Chihuahuan Desert lyre snake, Trans-Pecos black-headed 

snake, Texas horned lizard) and one federally listed species (Northern aplomado falcon) could 

occur in limited numbers in the vicinity of the site. It is conceivable that small numbers of these 

state listed reptiles or Northern aplomado falcons could be disturbed by launch noise or sonic 

booms. Any disturbance would be brief (less than approximately one minute) and create impacts 

similar to those currently experienced as a result of military aircraft overflying the proposed 

launch site. Depending on the species and its sensitivity to noise, there would likely be some 

level of startle response, with normal activity ceasing for a minute or so, then resuming when the 

launch noise or sonic boom noise diminished. 

4.2.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permit or license would be issued to Blue 

Origin for the proposed activities at the Culberson County, Texas location. Therefore, there 

would be no impacts to ecological resources from launch operations. 

4.3 Cultural/Native American Resources 

The following discussion explores possible sources of impact to determine if the potential for 

impacts on cultural resources exists under the various alternatives. Potential direct and indirect 

impacts on cultural resources are assessed by comparing the locations of known cultural 

resources identified in the ROI with the locations of activities under the alternatives. 

Potential impacts on cultural resources are assessed using the “criteria of adverse effect” 

(36 CFR Part 800.5[a][1]), as defined in the implementing regulations for the NHPA. An 

adverse effect occurs when an undertaking may alter the characteristics of an historic property or 

traditional cultural property (TCP) that make it eligible for the National Register. Therefore, the 

analysis of impacts using these criteria is limited to those resources determined as eligible or 

potentially eligible. There are five broad categories of effect: (1) physical destruction or 

alteration; (2) isolation and restriction of access; (3) introduction of visible, audible, or 

atmospheric elements out of character with the resource; (4) neglect leading to deterioration or 

vandalism; and (5) transfer, sale, or lease from Federal to non-Federal control without adequate 

restrictions to ensure preservation. For this EA, an impact is equivalent to an adverse effect. 

Under the various alternatives, categories (1) and (3) could apply. Possible sources of direct 

impacts can include physical destruction resulting from groundbreaking activities; access to 

construction areas by large machinery; improvement of existing access and storm water control 

measures; use of staging areas for storage of equipment and supplies; and future maintenance 

activities. These physical impacts can occur to both known sites and subsurface sites that could 

be discovered during groundbreaking activities. Indirect impacts on cultural resources are often 

not quantifiable and can occur to cultural resources both within and outside the project area. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-16

Possible sources of indirect impacts can include physical harm resulting from changes in erosion 

patterns that are caused by construction, compaction of the soil, or removal of vegetation; 

increased vandalism or illegal artifact collecting of resources due to the presence of construction 

and maintenance workers in the area; and an increased probability for inadvertent physical harm 

to resources both in the short and long term. 

The potential for impacts on TCPs or to ethnographic resources that are not recommended as 

eligible for listing on the National Register but were identified as important to tribes is based on 

tribal concerns identified during tribal consultation. Potential impacts to religious and sacred 

sites are addressed in the context of the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (42 U.S.C. 

1996) and EO 13007 Indian Sacred Sites, which provide for Federal protection and consideration 

of religious practices that might be impacted under the alternatives. Potential impacts could 

include physical impacts to religious or sacred sites, loss of access to sites, and burdens on the 

practice of religion by traditional practitioners. Potential indirect impacts can include the 

introduction of visual or auditory elements out of character with a TCP or ethnographic resource. 

These can result from introducing modern buildings and machinery into an otherwise rural or 

natural setting. 

Currently, no potential impacts, direct or indirect, are known for TCPs or ethnographic resources 

under the proposed action or no action alternative. 

The FAA consulted with the Texas SHPO to identify important historic properties, determine 

potential impacts to those properties, and to identify measures to avoid or mitigate adverse 

impacts. A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was developed by the FAA, the Texas SHPO, 

and Blue Origin, that describes what measures are to be taken regarding avoidance or mitigation 

of impacts on historic properties as a result of the proposed action. 

4.3.1 Proposed Action 

4.3.1.1 Construction 

The proposed locations where construction activities would occur for the Blue Origin launch site 

contain one archaeological site determined eligible for the National Register. The site is 

designated 41CU696 and is a scatter of thermal features and chipped stone, ground stone, and 

ceramic artifact shards. 

Site 41CU696 is located along the South entrance road at the entrance gate to the project area 

from Highway 54. Widening and improvements to this road and gate would result in physical 

damage to the site. Because of the size and orientation of 41CU696, a new location for the 

entrance road could not be identified. To reduce the amount of impact to the site under the 

proposed action, the width of the construction corridor through the site would be limited from 

30.5 meters (100 feet) to 9.5 meters (31 feet). To ensure that construction activities would not 

extend outside the 9.5-meter (31-foot) corridor, the 9.5-meter (31-foot) boundary would be 

permanently fenced. Prior to construction activities occurring within 30.5 meters (100 feet) of 

Site 41CU696, data recovery excavations would occur within the 9.5-meter (31-foot) corridor to 

recover the archaeological data that would be damaged. The mitigation activities would be 

conducted in consultation with the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), and would 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-17

occur per a Memorandum of Agreement and mitigation plan signed by Blue Origin, AST, and 

the SHPO. 

The survey identified an additional site, designated 41CU695, which is a scatter of thermal 

features and chipped stone, ground stone, and ceramic artifact shards. Site 41CU695 is located 

in the portion of the project area where the northwest corner of the launch site perimeter fence 

and adjacent firebreak was proposed to be constructed. Construction of the fence and firebreak 

would have resulted in physical damage to the site. In an effort to avoid 41CU695, a route for 

that portion of the fence and firebreak was identified. A survey of a corridor for the new route 

found no eligible resources. A temporary fence around 41CU695 would be installed during the 

construction of the fence and firebreak to ensure that site 41CU695 would not be inadvertently 

impacted during construction activities. By utilizing the new route for the fence and firebreak, 

and fencing 41CU695 temporarily during construction of the fence and firebreak, 41CU695 

would not be directly impacted by the proposed action. These activities avoid impacts on 

41CU695 as described in the MOA developed by the FAA, Texas SHPO, and Blue Origin. 

Indirect impacts on cultural resources are not quantifiable and could occur to cultural resources 

both in and outside of the project area. Construction of facilities and associated compaction of 

soils and removal of vegetation would affect erosion patterns, which in turn could physically 

harm resources. To address this possible impact, construction activities would be carefully 

planned and conducted according to best management practices to minimize erosion. For 

example, secured hay bales would be used to trap sediment from disturbed areas to lessen 

erosion, and runoff retention dams and diversion berms would be constructed. ‘V’ trenches 

would be constructed along the road to address rain water run off from the road near the cultural 

site. The increase in activities and workers in the area during construction could result in 

vandalism or illegal artifact collecting at archaeological sites. Prior to beginning work, all 

employees and contractors conducting construction activities would be educated regarding 

cultural resources in the project area, appropriate avoidance measures, and associated restrictions 

regarding vandalism and illegal artifact collecting. The presence of construction activities would 

also increase the chance for inadvertent physical harm to cultural resources. All construction 

areas would be fenced or staked during all construction activities to prevent any activities from 

proceeding outside of the approved construction area. Also, construction management and staff 

would be educated on the requirement that all activities must take place within approved areas. 

These measures would help prevent impacts to cultural resources outside the approved work 

areas. 

If during construction activities previously unknown cultural deposits are discovered, 

construction activities in the area would halt and a qualified archaeologist would evaluate the 

discovery in consultation with the Texas SHPO. 

4.3.1.2 Operation 

Direct impacts on cultural resources from maintenance or operation activities at the launch site 

would be unlikely because these activities would take place within areas already disturbed by 

construction. The South entrance road would be permanently fenced through site 41CU696 at 

the 31-foot boundary, preventing any expansion of the road width within the site as a result of 

maintenance activities. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-18

Indirect impacts could occur to cultural resources both in and outside of the project area as a 

result of ground-disturbing maintenance activities. Maintenance activities and workers in the 

area could result in vandalism or illegal artifact collecting at archaeological sites. Prior to 

beginning work, all employees and contractors conducting maintenance activities would be 

educated regarding cultural resources in the project area, appropriate avoidance measures, and 

associated restrictions regarding vandalism and illegal artifact collecting. The presence of 

ground-disturbing maintenance activities would also increase the chance for inadvertent physical 

harm to cultural resources. All maintenance areas would be fenced or staked during all grounddisturbing activities to prevent any activities from proceeding outside of the approved 

maintenance area. Also, maintenance management and staff would be educated on the 

requirement that all ground-disturbing activities must take place within approved areas. These 

measures would help prevent impacts to cultural resources outside the approved work areas. 

If during maintenance activities previously unknown cultural deposits are discovered, grounddisturbing activities in the area would halt and a qualified archaeologist would evaluate the 

discovery in consultation with the Texas SHPO. 

4.3.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permits or licenses would be issued to Blue 

Origin for the proposed activities at the Culberson County, Texas location. Therefore, there 

would be no impacts on cultural resources from launch operations. 

4.4 Hazardous Materials/Waste Management 

4.4.1 Proposed Action 

4.4.1.1 Construction 

As described in Section 2.4.2, under the proposed action, only the facilities required to support 

the New Shepard RLV system would be constructed. The construction activities would use 

small quantities of hazardous materials, which would result in generation of small volumes of 

hazardous wastes. The hazardous materials that are expected to be used are common to 

construction activities and include diesel fuel, gasoline, and liquefied natural gas to fuel the 

construction equipment, hydraulic fluids, oils and lubricants, welding gases, paints, solvents, 

adhesives, and batteries. Appropriate hazardous material management techniques would be 

followed to minimize their use and waste disposal. The use, management, and disposal of 

hazardous materials for both the construction and operations phases are described in Exhibit 4-8. 

Nonhazardous and hazardous waste generated during construction of the launch site would 

include construction debris, empty containers, spent solvents, waste oil, spill cleanup materials 

(if used), and lead-acid batteries from construction equipment. Construction contractors would 

be responsible for safely removing these wastes from the site for recycling or disposal in 

accordance with applicable requirements. 

Debris resulting from site preparation such as brush and stumps would be burned on site, and soil 

excavated during construction activities would be stockpiled for on site use. Given the 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-19

Exhibit 4-8. Hazardous Materials Use and Waste Management at the Proposed Blue 

Origin Launch Site 

Hazardous Materials Use and Management 

Material Use Management 

Hydraulic fluid and 

lubrication oils 

Construction equipment Stored on impervious surface 

with spill cleanup materials 

available. Used oils (< 189 liters 

[50 gallons] per year) would be 

collected for recycling 

Welding gases Construction of launch site structures 

and fabrication and maintenance of 

equipment in on site welding and 

machine shops. 

Consumed in welding operations. 

Cylinders will be removed from 

launch site by vendors. 

Diesel fuel, gasoline, 

liquefied petroleum 

gas 

Fuel for construction equipment 

estimated at 378,541 liters (100,000 

gallons) of diesel fuel and 227,125 

liters (60,000 gallons) of gasoline. 

Up to 227,125 liters (60,000 gallons) 

of diesel fuel could be used in the first 

year of operation before the site 

connected to the regional grid. 

Thereafter, relatively small amounts 

of diesel fuel (<26,498 liters [7,000 

gallons]) would be consumed. 

Stored in above ground tanks 

with secondary containment and 

periodic inspections. 

Paints, primers, 

thinners, cleaning 

fluids, degreasers, 

adhesives, sealants, 

isopropyl alcohol 

Construction and maintenance of 

launch site facilities and equipment, 

cleaning of dust sensitive equipment, 

and laboratory use. 

Limited quantities stored on site 

at any one time. Small amounts 

(<379 liters [100 gallons] per 

year) of spent solvents would be 

transported off site for disposal. 

Kerosene and 

hydrogen peroxide 

(90 percent) 

Propellants used in the propulsion 

module for the New Shepard RLV 

estimated at 46,720 kilograms 

(103,000 lbs) of HTP and 5,443 

kilograms (12,000) lbs of kerosene 

per launch 

Delivered to the launch site in 

DOT approved trucks and 

containers. Stored in tanks with 

containment. Consumed during 

launch or recovered from RLV 

after landing. 

Explosives Solid rocket motors and small 

pyrotechnic-actuated valve and cutter 

assemblies used in RLV 

Stored in DOT approved 

shipping containers in a 

dedicated area away from the 

VPF and other operations and 

administrative buildings. 

Consumed in launch operations. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-20

Hazardous Materials Use and Management 

Material Use Management 

Compressed helium 

and nitrogen gases 

Provides inert atmosphere during 

RLV assembly and testing (up to 50 

12.2 meter (40-foot) tube trailer 

deliveries of compressed gases per 

year) 

Cylinders will be removed from 

launch site by vendors. 

Waste Management 

Construction debris Scrap lumber, metal, cardboard, 

paper, etc. 

Removed for off site recycling or 

disposal during construction 

phase. 

Spent solvents, 

paper, waste oil, 

batteries, spill 

cleanup materials, 

antifreeze, and empty 

containers 

From construction, grounds keeping, 

housekeeping, maintenance, and spill 

response (as required) activities 

Removed for appropriate off site 

recycling or disposal during 

construction and launch 

operations. 

Sewage From portable toilets during 

construction and a combination of 

central sewage treatment and septic 

systems during launch operations 

Contents of portable toilets 

would be removed by vendor. 

Contents of septic tank would be 

drained periodically and removed 

for off site disposal. 

anticipated number of construction personnel, the volume of non-recyclable, nonhazardous waste 

is expected to be small. Transporters of solid waste would be required to contain waste during 

transport, promptly remove any waste spilled, and clean the affected areas. The amount of 

construction generated waste (approximately 1,270 metric tones [1,400 tons]) from the proposed 

site would be negligible, less than significant, in comparison to the quantity of municipal solid 

waste (approximately 381,018 metric tones [420,000 tons] per year) that is typically disposed of 

in this region. 

The Texas state regulations (Texas Administrative Code, Title 30 - Environmental Quality, 

Chapter 335, Subchapter C) include requirements for identifying and characterizing hazardous 

wastes; obtaining a hazardous waste facility identification number; and hazardous waste storage, 

transportation, and recordkeeping requirements. The hazardous waste generator category for the 

proposed launch site during the construction phase is expected to be no more than a “small 

quantity generator” (i.e., generates more than 220 pounds [100 kilograms] but less than 2,200 

pounds [1,000 kilograms] of hazardous waste in any calendar month). The hazardous waste 

generation rate for the launch site is expected to average less than 45.4 kilograms (100 pounds) 

per month. The facility would qualify as a “conditionally exempt small quantity generator” (i.e., 

less than 220 pounds [100 kilograms] of hazardous waste per calendar month). All hazardous 

waste would be shipped off site for appropriate treatment or disposal in accordance with the 

applicable generator classification. The types and quantities of hazardous waste associated with 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-21

launch site operations could easily be accommodated by existing commercial treatment and 

disposal capacity within the state. 

The state of Texas regulations include an industrial waste classification system (see Texas 

Administrative Code Sections 335.1(15)-(17) for waste classes) and require that industrial 

facilities obtain a solid waste registration number and submit an annual waste summary report if 

they generate more than 220 pounds (99.8 kilograms) of Class 1 industrial waste per month. 

Class 1 wastes include both hazardous wastes and certain nonhazardous industrial wastes (e.g., a 

container that previously held a hazardous substance, petroleum substances or waste containing 

petroleum substances, water contaminated with ethylene glycol). Waste generated during the 

construction of the launch site would be managed in accordance with the State’s industrial waste 

requirements. 

Sewage generated during construction activities (e.g., from portable toilets) would be removed 

for off site disposal. Some sewage may be managed in on site septic systems. The contents of 

the septic systems would be periodically removed for off site disposal. The average and peak 

construction workforce is estimated at 45 and 70 individuals, respectively. Based on an 

engineering guide of 284 to 473 liters (75 to 125 gallons) of water usage per day per worker, the 

construction workforce would generate approximately 511,031 to 794,936 liters (135,000 to 

210,000 gallons) of sanitary wastewater per month. The appropriate permits would be obtained 

through the TCEQ Culberson County office for installation of on site sewage facilities. 

An on site concrete batch plant would operate for approximately five months during the peak 

construction period. Waste water associated with the batch plant would be disposed on site. 

4.4.1.2 Operation 

The hazardous material management practices described above for construction would also be 

followed during launch site operations. The majority of the hazardous materials used in launch 

operations are the propellants for the New Shepard RLV and compressed gases. Small solid 

rocket motors and explosive devices such as linear shaped charges and detonators would also be 

used for non-routine (emergency) flight operations and development flight tests. The use, 

management, and disposal of hazardous materials for both the construction and operations 

phases are described in Exhibit 4-8. 

Other hazardous materials used in support of launch operations would include isopropyl alcohol 

and acetone used for cleaning. These other materials would be stored in National Fire Protection 

Association and International Fire Code approved flammable storage cabinets in quantities of 

37.9 liters (10 gallons) or less for each material. Annual usage of isopropyl alcohol and acetone 

is expected to be less than 379 liters (100 gallons) each. 

Propellants used for the New Shepard RLV include rocket propulsion grade kerosene (RP-1) and 

90 percent concentration hydrogen peroxide. These propellants would be delivered to the 

proposed site in licensed, DOT approved tank trucks, on an as needed basis. The RP-1 fuel 

would be delivered in 26,498-liter (7,000-gallon) tank trucks, and the hydrogen peroxide would 

be delivered at 90 percent concentration in 15,142-liter (4,000-gallon) tank trucks. No 

manufacturing or concentration of hydrogen peroxide would occur at the launch site. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-22

RP-1 would be stored on site in a 37,854-liter (10,000-gallon) National Fire Protection 

Association and International Fire Code approved, Underwriter’s Laboratories listed 

aboveground storage tank. This tank would utilize integral secondary containment with double 

wall construction, and would be equipped with over-fill protection devices and hydrocarbon leak 

detectors monitoring the interstitial space between the tanks walls. Tank level and leak sensors 

would be continuously monitored by an automatic system with local and off-site alarm 

notifications. The fuel storage tank would have a code-required vent located 3.7 meters (12 feet) 

above the ground. Atmospheric emissions of fuel vapors by evaporation from the storage tank 

would be less than 0.9 kilograms (2 pounds) per day. The fuel storage tank would be protected 

by concrete-filled steel bollards to prevent accidental damage by delivery and service vehicles, 

and surrounded by a locked chain-link fence. Tank drain and fill valves would be secured with 

locks when not being operated for propellant transfer operations. 

The 90 percent concentration hydrogen peroxide would be stored in three, 37,854-liter (10,000-

gallon) aboveground storage tanks constructed of high-purity aluminum specially designed for 

long-term compatibility with concentrated hydrogen peroxide. The hydrogen peroxide storage 

tanks would be enclosed by concrete secondary containment dikes with 200 percent of total tank 

volume capacity. The hydrogen peroxide tanks would also be surrounded by a locked chain-link 

fence, and tank fill/drain valves would be secured with locks when not being used for propellant 

transfer operations. The hydrogen peroxide storage tanks would be equipped with tank level and 

temperature sensors which are continuously monitored by an automatic system with local and 

off-site alarm notifications. These tanks would also incorporate manually- or automaticallyactivated water deluge systems to cool and dilute the hydrogen peroxide in the tanks in the 

unlikely event of temperature increase due to decomposition of product. Hydrogen peroxide 

storage tanks would be protected from solar heat gain by a metal roof structure over the 

containment dikes. The tank secondary containment dikes would include a sump area with water 

dilution capability to collect small drips or spills. This sump area would be emptied after any 

spill using a water-driven jet eductor pump to dilute the spilled hydrogen peroxide and transfer it 

to a waste peroxide holding tank for further dilution and decomposition to water and oxygen. 

Propellant transfer operations to New Shepard RLVs would be accomplished using automated 

pumping systems. Propellants would be transferred to the RLV via small pipelines contained in 

covered concrete trenches. The hydrogen peroxide transfer plumbing would be equipped with a 

double-wall jacket, and a leak detector monitoring the interstitial space between the transfer 

piping and the outer jacket. This leak detector would be continuously monitored during transfers 

by an automated system which terminates propellant delivery in the event of a leak. This system 

would also monitor propellant flow rates, pressures, temperatures, and propellant load delivered 

to the New Shepard RLV and would protect against overfill of the tanks onboard the vehicle. 

After hydrogen peroxide loading of the vehicle is completed, the transfer piping would be purged 

of residual hydrogen peroxide with gaseous nitrogen. Residual hydrogen peroxide would be 

diluted with water to less than 50 percent concentration and collected in the waste peroxide 

holding tank for further dilution and decomposition to water and oxygen. 

RP-1 fuel transfer plumbing would likewise be contained in a covered concrete trench. The 

trench would be equipped with water sensors and hydrocarbon leak detectors which would 

automatically terminate transfer operations in the event of a leak. The propellant loading system 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-23

would also monitor propellant flow rates, pressures, temperatures, and propellant load delivered 

to the New Shepard RLV and would protect against overfill of the tanks onboard the vehicle. 

Propellant transfer operations would be rigorously controlled with procedures and equipment to 

minimize the likelihood of a leak or accidental spill. The permanent launch site staff would 

include a trained HAZMAT/Emergency Response Team who are trained and certified in spill 

containment and cleanup procedures. This team would report and coordinate emergency 

responses as required to local, state, and Federal authorities. The Emergency Response team 

would maintain a vehicle stocked with spill-response kits and personal protective equipment to 

handle fuel or hydrogen peroxide spills. The emergency response vehicle would be equipped 

with appropriate fire extinguishers and a water supply for dilution of hydrogen peroxide. The 

Emergency Response Team would maintain demonstrated proficiency by conducting semiannual drills in coordination with off-site emergency services. 

Small amounts of hazardous and nonhazardous wastes are expected to be generated during 

launch operations. Nonhazardous waste would be managed as described in Section 4.4.1.1 for 

disposal at an off site landfill. Similarly, hazardous wastes generated during launch operations 

would be transported off site to an appropriate disposal facility in accordance with applicable 

Federal and state requirements. The hazardous waste generator category for the proposed launch 

site during the operations phase is expected to be “conditionally exempt small quantity 

generator” (i.e., generates less than 99.8 kilograms [220 pounds] per calendar month). The waste 

generation rate for the launch site is expected to average less than 45 kilograms (100 pounds) per 

month. Hazardous waste would be shipped off site for appropriate treatment or disposal in 

accordance with the applicable generator classification. 

In accordance with EPA and TCEQ regulations, an explosives emergency response is exempt 

from RCRA permitting requirements if the situation involves an actual or potential imminent 

threat to human health or the environment. As described in Section 4.13, open burning would be 

used to dispose of any igniter or solid rocket motor fragments collected by emergency response 

personnel in the event of an off-nominal landing of the abort module. Any open burning that is 

not performed as part of an explosives emergency response (e.g., disposal of propellant from 

tests), would be conducted in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements. 

Sewage generated during launch operations would be managed in the central sewage treatment 

plant and on site septic systems. The contents of the septic systems would be periodically 

removed for off site disposal. The operations workforce is estimated at eight fulltime security 

personnel and 15 personnel supporting flight preparations and launches for a total of 23 

individuals. It is estimated that the operations workforce would generate approximately 102,206 

liters (27,000 gallons) of sanitary wastewater per month, based on a conservative value of 60 

people daily. 

There would be no routine wastewater generation associated with launch operations. Any 

wastewater accumulation would be associated with an off-normal event such as a spill or 

activation of a fire suppression system. The wastewater would be disposed on site, if 

appropriate, or transported off site to a treatment facility. There would be no significant 

wastewater management impacts. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-24

4.4.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permits or licenses would be issued to Blue 

Origin for the proposed activities at the Culberson County, Texas location. Hazardous materials 

would not be required to support launch operations. There would be no hazardous or solid 

waste, sewage, or wastewater generation from launch operations. 

4.5 Land Use (including Farmland and Section 4(f) Resources) 

4.5.1 Proposed Action 

The proposed launch facility complex lies within a large, privately-owned property known as 

“The Corn Ranch.” The Corn Ranch consists of desert scrubland and grassland that was settled 

in the late 19th century and used as ranchland until 2004. The Corn Ranch is now maintained by 

the property owner as a wildlife management area and for personal use. 

Section 4(f) properties would not be significantly impacted by the proposed action because it 

does not require the use of any section 4(f) properties, and it does not create a “constructive use” 

that substantially impairs the properties. Section 4(f) properties are not substantially impaired 

because the impacts of the proposed action are not sufficiently serious that the value of the site in 

terms of its prior significance and enjoyment are substantially reduced or lost. 

No farmlands or agricultural use lands are located on the proposed site. No prime farmland, 

unique farmland, farmland of state importance, or general farmland would be converted to a nonagricultural use as a result of the proposed action. No conflicts with existing agricultural uses 

would occur as a result of the proposed action. 

4.5.1.1 Construction 

Construction of the launch site would result in converting about 90 hectares (223 acres) of desert 

scrubland and grassland into industrial areas. This relatively small area represents 1.2 percent of 

the approximately 7,527 hectares (18,600 acres) proposed site and less than a small fraction of 

the larger Corn Ranch property. As discussed in Section 3.2.1, the proposed launch site lies in 

the Great Chihuahuan Desert, which includes parts of Mexico, Arizona, New Mexico, and west 

Texas and covers approximately 453,250 square kilometers (175,000 square miles, 112,000,000 

acres). 

4.5.1.2 Operation 

Operation of the launch site would necessitate the fencing and enclosure of approximately 7,527 

hectares (18,600 acres) of desert scrubland and grassland that was rangeland until 2004 and is 

currently managed as a private wildlife management area. This acreage would continue to 

provide habitat for wildlife, particularly species that are more tolerant of noise and a human 

presence. Land use would be essentially unchanged; only the core facility areas would be 

converted to industrial use. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-25

4.5.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permits or licenses would be issued to Blue 

Origin for the proposed activities at the Culberson County, Texas location. Land would not be 

required to support launch operations. There would be no change in land use from these 

operations. 

4.6 Visual Resources 

4.6.1 Proposed Action 

As described in Section 2.4.2, the land proposed for the launch site was formerly used for cattle 

ranching. Construction would be limited to the small number of facilities and limited 

infrastructure required to support the launch site. The existing visual and aesthetic conditions of 

the proposed launch site and surrounding lands are described in Sections 3.4 and 3.5.2. The 

existing conditions of the launch site and the adjacent landscape would be rated as moderate to 

high visual sensitivity due to the undisturbed desert setting of the valley and surrounding 

picturesque mountain ranges. 

4.6.1.1 Construction 

As described in Section 3.5.1, impacts to visual and aesthetic resources are often considered in 

terms of visual dominance and visual sensitivity. During the construction phase, the visual 

landscape would be impacted primarily by construction activities associated with the two launch 

site access road improvements that would intersect State Highway 54 and the associated vehicle 

traffic traveling to and from the launch site. All existing dirt roads accessing or within the 

launch site would be widened (ground disturbance) and improved using native aggregate 

materials. Other anticipated construction activities would include utility and security fencing 

and gate installation, security lighting and signs on or closely adjacent to State Highway 54 for 

safety and to identify the launch site access point(s) for construction vendors and the associated 

dust and glare (reflections) from light and heavy vehicle traffic. The construction may require 

additional temporary workspace on or adjacent to the right-of-way on State Highway 54 to 

accommodate construction traffic on the launch site access roads. As a result, these activities 

and impacts would be rated visually dominant during the construction phase. 

The launch site facilities would be built five miles to the east of State Highway 54. 

Approximately 308 hectares (760 acres) of land would be disturbed to develop facilities and 

infrastructure including buildings, storage tanks, launch and landing pads, access roads, parking 

areas, fencing, and lighting. A fire break would be cleared along the perimeter fence to prevent 

the spread of fire on or off the launch site. It is anticipated that no more than the top half of the 

tallest building on the site would visible to motorists traveling south on State Highway 54 

because of location of the highway in the valley floor and ridges between the highway and the 

launch site. However, Highway 54 reaches an elevation some 90 to 150 meters (300 to 500 feet) 

above the launch site when passing through the Baylor Mountains north of Van Horn. Although 

the launch site is some 13 to 16 kilometers (8 to 10 miles) from the highway at that point, most 

buildings would be visible as well as disturbed areas on the ground because the soils are white in 

color. Most conspicuous during the day would be fire break, roads, soil stockpiles, structures 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-26

under construction, support facilities and construction equipment and vehicles due to glare, 

reflections and dust generation. Most conspicuous during the night would be the launch site 

construction lighting. At night, lighting at the access gates and from the launch site construction 

areas would be visible along a six to eight mile stretch of State Highway 54 west and south of the 

launch site. As a result, these construction activities and impacts would be rated visually codominant given the landscape and duration they are observed. 

Best construction practices would be used for dust and soil controls to mitigate the visual impact 

of construction both at State Highway 54 and within the launch site. Dust and lighting controls 

would also be implemented to avoid unnecessary impacts to the visual sensitivity of the area at 

night. It is anticipated that the lighting of the access points and launch site would be more 

visually dominant during the construction phase due to the number and types of lighting used, 

however; the majority of that lighting would be temporary. 

4.6.1.2 Operation 

The visual impacts associated with construction improvements of the two launch site access 

roads would be reduced because of the absence of construction vehicles, their associated glare 

and dust generation and the removal of temporary construction signs, fencing, gates and lighting. 

Permanent lighting would be installed that would minimize the impact of light pollution in this 

remote area by directing light to the ground where it is needed for safety and security. When the 

launch site becomes operational, approximately 90 hectares (223 acres) of land would be 

committed to facilities and infrastructure. This represents a two-thirds reduction in the acreage 

impacted during construction. 

During operations, vehicle activity would include passenger vehicles of Blue Origin personnel 

and the occasional tractor trailer to and from the site. These vehicles would deliver supplies and 

equipment to the launch site in support of the launch vehicle(s). Light pollution would be 

negligible unless there was a night launch. 

The visual landscape would be most impacted by the flight of the launch vehicle. The launch 

vehicle would leave a contrail as a result of the fuel mixture being combusted. During a day 

launch, the rocket would emit a white exhaust plume of smoke and steam and a combustion light 

source (flame). As the vehicle gains altitude, its vertical contrail would more closely resemble 

the generally horizontal contrail of a jet aircraft. The launch vehicle would free fall back to 

Earth and then the engines would be restarted for landing. If the FAA authorized night launches, 

the launch and landing facilities would have extra lighting for safety. The lighting would be 

directed to the grounds around the launch facilities and would produce minimal light pollution. 

The vehicle would produce the most light during night operations when the exhaust plume would 

be illuminated by the light produced by the combusting fuel. During a night launch, with clear 

skies, the vehicle would be visible from Highway 54 and the south side of the Guadalupe 

Mountains National Park. After the vehicle rises above the Baylor Mountains, the vehicle would 

be visible from Van Horn, when looking north. The vehicle’s vertical contrail would resemble 

the generally horizontal contrail produced by a jet aircraft from a distance of 5 to 8 kilometers (3 

to 5 miles). 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-27

The light emitted by the vehicle would be brief in duration due to the short operation of the 

engine. The nominal flight time for the vehicle is anticipated to be less than 10 minutes from 

lift-off to touchdown at the landing pad as described in Section 2.4.2.2. Further, the intensity of 

the light would be limited by the vehicle’s altitude, the contrail and atmospheric conditions. As a 

result, the plume and contrail impacts would be rated visually co-dominant when the vehicle 

launches and lands during the day and the plume impacts would be rated visually dominant when 

the vehicle is launched and lands during the night. 

As discussed in Section 4.2.1.2, weather balloons would be released in association with launches 

and could return to earth to land at the launch site. If this were to occasionally occur, the latex 

balloons or balloon pieces, which are generally light-colored, would quickly weather and 

degrade and would not be noticeable on the site, which is dotted with white rocks and patches of 

light-colored soil.

4.6.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permits or licenses would be issued to Blue 

Origin for the proposed activities at the Culberson County, Texas location. There would be no 

visual impacts from launch operations. 

4.7 Noise 

4.7.1 Proposed Action 

4.7.1.1 Construction 

Construction activities would include excavation, digging and pouring of foundations, erection 

of buildings, and construction of roads and utilities. These activities would temporarily increase 

the ambient noise levels at the proposed launch complex. Such activities could potentially create 

individual noise sources ranging from 70 to 100 dBA at 30 meters (100 feet) from the activities. 

(Golden et al. 1980) Traffic noise from commuting workers’ trucks on the road to the launch 

complex would also increase. The construction-related noise could last approximately 12 

months, but would not be appreciable off site, given the size of the property, the proximity of the 

construction activity to the highway and the sparseness of the surrounding population. Workers 

would be protected from noise in accordance with OSHA regulations. 

4.7.1.2 Operation 

Rocket noise is a result of the interaction of the exhaust jet with the atmosphere, and to a lesser 

extent, the combustion of the fuel. The sound pressure from a rocket is related to the engine’s 

thrust level and other design features. Blue Origin has not completed development of the New 

Shepard vehicle or its engines, and thus, there are no test results. Nevertheless, a thrust of 

230,000 pounds force is expected at liftoff. This thrust is considerably less than that of the 

Castor 120 rocket motor, which has an average thrust of approximately 370,000 pounds force 

and a maximum thrust of 435,000 pounds force. Therefore, the Taurus rocket, which uses the 

Castor 120 motor, is used in this analysis as a surrogate for evaluation of launch noise impacts at 

the launch facility. The New Shepard vehicle would be expected to produce less noise. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-28

The sound from Taurus launches has been extensively studied. The Kodiak Launch Complex 

EA (FAA 1996) provided a composite of three sources of noise studies. One source consisted of 

actual measurements of two static tests. Another data set resulted from computer modeling of a 

launch by Thiokol, the manufacturer of the Castor 120. The third source was from the Taurus 

Environmental Assessment. Exhibit 4-9 presents a composite of these three sources, as reported 

in the Kodiak EA. The sound from a Taurus launch was again measured in October 1998 at 

Vandenberg Air Force Base. (SRS Technologies 1998) The noise at the four measured locations 

is also depicted on Exhibit 4-9. The frequency distribution of Taurus rocket noise peaks around 

70 hertz, which is typical of the very low frequency noise from rocket engines. At frequencies 

above 200 hertz, the sound pressure level is greatly decreased. 

Exhibit 4-9. Predicted Overall Sound Levels from a Hypothetical Taurus Launch at the 

Blue Origin Launch Site 

The nearest public access to the launch and landing platforms is approximately 8.5 kilometers 

(5.3 miles) away on Highway 54. Launch noise at that location would be approximately 85 

dBA, approximately the same as that experienced by a person standing 9.1 meters (30 feet) from 

a highway when a heavy truck passes. The nearest residence, which is approximately 

10.9 kilometers (6.8 miles) away, would experience slightly less than 85 dBA. The frequency 

distribution, however, would be much lower for both observers and, thus, typically less irritating 

to humans. The duration of launch noise is approximately one minute (FAA 2001; SRS 

Taurus Launch Noise

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Distance (miles)

Sound Level - dBA

Composite Data

1998 Report
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-29

Technologies 1998), with the peak noise lasting from 5 to 15 seconds after launch. (FAA 2001) 

The nearest population center, Van Horn, is approximately 40 kilometers (25 miles) away. 

These noise values are based on a Taurus launch and would be expected to be less for the New 

Shepard vehicle. Other than annoyance, there is no known adverse effect to humans from short 

term noises of this magnitude. (FAA 2001) Given the short duration of the launch noise and the 

infrequency of the launches (typically on an average of one per week), public annoyance is 

expected to be minimal. 

During vehicle landing, the rocket engine would again produce noise. Maximum thrust during 

landing is in the range of 100,000 pounds force. This value is considerably less than the thrust at 

liftoff and begins at a height of approximately one-half mile. The thrust gradually decreases to 

approximately tens of thousands of pounds force as the vehicle approaches the ground surface. 

Therefore, the landing noise is substantially less than liftoff noise and lasts less than 20 seconds. 

Blue Origin workers would normally be two miles away at the Operations Control Center during 

launches. Given the noise data in Exhibit 4-8, these workers would be unlikely to be exposed to 

sound levels greater than 115 dBA, the OSHA 15-minute standard. However, any workers 

potentially exposed to noise greater than any OSHA standard would be required to wear hearing 

protection. 

The noise profile of the solid emergency separation motors is smaller than that of the New 

Shepard vehicle. Because emergency separation would be an infrequent occurrence, the impacts 

would be insignificant. 

In addition to the noise of the rocket engine, sonic booms are possible. A sonic boom is a sound 

that is produced by a shock wave that forms around a vehicle that is traveling faster than the 

speed of sound. The effects of sonic booms are startle response in humans and biota, and, in 

extreme cases, damage to structures. The potential for, and the intensity of, a sonic boom being 

heard on the surface of the earth are dependent on the vehicle length, the vehicle shape, the 

trajectory of the launch, the vehicle velocity, and weather conditions. Sonic booms are discussed 

in more detail in the Programmatic EIS for Licensing Launches. (FAA 2001) 

The standard method for determining sonic boom footprints for supersonic vehicles is the 

method of geometrical acoustics, or ray tracing. (Plotkin 1989) The theory states that the 

acoustic disturbance generated by a supersonic vehicle in steady flight at a particular instant 

propagates along a cone of rays opening forward of the aircraft’s velocity vector. For a 

supersonic aircraft in horizontal flight, this ray cone will eventually intersect the ground at a 

future time, forming the hyperbolic boom footprint at ground level. The New Shepard vehicle 

launch trajectory is vertical, however, i.e., no pitch-over as in most other types of launches. 

Therefore, during the ascent portion of a launch, the ray cone and the corresponding sonic boom 

from the New Shepard vehicle would not intersect the ground. Instead, it would propagate away 

from the Earth’s surface and not be heard. While the possibility exists that a boom propagating 

into free space may reflect off the thermosphere and back to the ground (referred to as an “overthe-top” boom), such booms are generally inaudible. (Plotkin 1989) 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-30

During landing, the vehicle descends base first in a nearly vertical trajectory. Under these 

conditions, the vehicle would produce a sonic boom footprint consisting of concentric circles 

centered on the landing pad, with the ground along a particular circle experiencing the same 

magnitude of sonic boom. Each concentric circle represents the intersection of a ray cone 

generated at a particular instant during the supersonic descent phase with the ground. The 

magnitude of the sonic boom would be weaker for the circles with larger radii and stronger 

nearer the test pad. The vehicle would decelerate as it drops through the atmosphere, producing 

an N-wave pressure profile rather than an amplified U-wave pressure profile that would be 

associated with an accelerating vehicle. Also, the vehicle would drop to subsonic speeds 

relatively high in the atmosphere (approximately 9,100 meters (30,000 feet) or higher), 

mitigating the boom felt at ground level. 

The strongest boom would produce an N-shaped pressure wave with duration of less than 160 

milliseconds and a peak overpressure of 0.7 kilograms (1.6 pounds) per square foot at 

approximately a 1.3-kilometer (0.8-mile) radial distance from the landing pad. The peak noise 

level from this boom would be equivalent to 90 dBA or 107 dBC for a fraction of a second. This 

highest intensity boom would be generated at the instant the vehicle decelerates to subsonic 

speeds. 

At the closest location where workers and visitors could be located, a distance of 6.1 kilometers 

(3.8 miles) from the landing pad, the peak overpressure would be 1.0 pound per square foot (85 

dBA or 103 dBC). At the nearest public access on Highway 54, the sonic boom overpressure 

would also be approximately 1.0 pound per square foot (85 dBA or 103 dBC). At 12.9 

kilometers (8 miles) the sonic boom sound level drops to 80 dBA or 100 dBC and drops to 68 

dBA or 93 dBC at 37 kilometers (23 miles). Beyond that distance, the sonic boom could be 

difficult to detect above normal conversation. These results are true for launch scenarios with 

attached propulsion module and crew capsule. Other flight profile scenarios envisioned, wherein 

the propulsion module and crew capsule would descend separately, would produce smaller sonic 

booms because the mass of each vehicle separately would be lower than the attached vehicle, and 

each vehicle descending separately would decelerate to subsonic speeds higher in the atmosphere 

than the attached vehicle. 

As described in Section 2.1.1.2, a diesel generator set would be used to provide backup electrical 

power to the launch site. The diesel generator would be sound insulated to ensure no more than 

74 dBA at 15 meters (50 feet). This noise would not be expected to be audible above 

background at the site boundary. Launch site personnel would be protected by engineering and 

administrative controls in accordance with OSHA regulation. 

Other sources of noise would be associated with non-launch operations at the complex and could 

include operation of vehicles and equipment; public address system; and heating, ventilating, and 

air conditioning systems. These noise sources would not likely be audible off site. 

As described in Section 3.7, the baseline noise levels in the region of the proposed launch site are 

those typical of a remote desert – approximately 22 to 38 dBA. The only noise sources from 

operation audible outside of the site boundary would be rocket noise during launch and landing 

and sonic boom during ascent. These activities would increase the Day Night Average Noise 

Level but because the noise would impact a sparsely-populated area there would be little or no 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-31

impact on sensitive receptors. Even at Blue Origin’s stated launch rate of up to 52 launches per 

year from 2010 onwards (see Section 2.1.1.3), the average duration of audible noise outside the 

proposed site from rocket noise or sonic boom would only be approximately 10 to 15 seconds 

per day, with night launches (if authorized by the FAA) occurring no more than once a month 

(see Section 2.1.1.4.6). 

4.7.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permits or licenses would be issued and there 

would be no rocket launches. Therefore, noise in the area would remain characteristic of a 

remote desert environment, punctuated by the sound of occasional low-altitude jet aircraft. 

4.8 Geology and Soils (including Floodplains) 

4.8.1 Proposed Action 

Impacts to geology, soils, and topography under the proposed action are discussed in this section. 

No impact on site geology or seismicity is anticipated from the construction or operations 

associated with the proposed action. Impacts on soils would be minor and mitigated by using 

best construction management practices. 

4.8.1.1 Construction 

Soil erosion is a potential concern during construction, but appropriate engineering and 

construction practices can reduce the likelihood of significant soil loss. Construction activities 

have the potential to disturb approximately 307 hectares (760 acres) of soil. Of this total, 

approximately 90 hectares (223 acres) are expected to be permanently covered with impermeable 

surfaces such as buildings, landing pads and parking areas. Because of the clay content of the 

site soils, it may be necessary to strip 30 to 122 centimeters (1 to 4 feet) below existing grade 

prior to construction of the facilities. Depending on the depth of excavation, the volume of soil 

excavated would range from approximately 3,822 to 15,291 cubic meters (15,000 to 60,000 

cubic yards). All surface vegetation, debris, and loose fill would be removed prior to placement 

of appropriate fill material. Some excavated site soils may be suitable for use as fill materials. 

The remaining excavated soil would be stockpiled for later use on the launch site and the Corn 

Ranch property or removed from the site and disposed of in accordance with applicable county 

ordinances and/or state regulations. 

Disruption of underlying bedrock would be limited to possible removal of geologic materials 

during construction of building foundations and facilities such as the flame bucket. These 

materials may be used for roads or foundations and additional geologic material may be removed 

from borrow pits at the site. Impact to topography would be limited to clearing areas for facility 

construction and road building. 

The design and construction of the launch site would take into account the geologic hazards and 

other considerations described below: 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-32

• Seismicity – There is seismic activity in the region (USGS NSHMP 2002), but it is 

mainly concentrated in the Rio Grande area to the west (see Exhibit 3-10). There is no 

indication of active faults within the boundaries of the proposed launch site. While there 

are indications of numerous faults east of the site associated with the Delaware 

Mountains, none of the site facilities would be located within 3.2 kilometers (2 miles) of 

any mapped geologic faults, including concealed or inferred faults (Exhibit 4-10). 

Facility foundations and structures have been designed to withstand predicted maximum 

seismic loads (see Exhibit 3-10). Based on preliminary geotechnical investigations at the 

site, the site would be classified as Site Class D (Stiff Soil Profile). The adjusted 

maximum expected accelerations are Sms=0.32 and Sm1=0.41. The design values of 

spectral acceleration are SDS=0.213 and SD1=0.096. The Seismic Use Group is 1 and the 

Seismic Design Category is B. Construction activities are not anticipated to impact site 

seismicity. 

• Localized Flooding – Construction activities would be evaluated to ensure that any 

alteration of these drainage features does not result in flooding of the facilities. The 

major facilities would be located in a basin surrounded by mountains, and it would be 

necessary to adequately manage the flow of runoff water from upgradient areas, in 

particular the Delaware Mountains to the east. This hazard can be minimized through 

proper facility engineering, design, and construction. 

• Localized flooding is possible during heavy rain events while construction is occurring. 

Facility structures would be located away from ephemeral streams that may flood during 

these events. Surface water runoff from precipitation events would be controlled in 

accordance with Best Management Practices. Ephemeral streams are indicated on the 

Exhibit 3-11 topographic map of the area by blue lines with long dashes separated by 

three dots. Three ephemeral streams are shown within the project area on this map. 

When water is flowing in these ephemeral streams, it will typically flow from east to 

west. The topographic map (Exhibit 3-11) indicates fairly well-defined (“vees” in the 

contour lines) drainage features for these streams as they cut across the 1,158- and 1,127-

meter (3,800- and 3,700-foot) elevation contours. West of the 1,127 meter (3,700 foot) 

contour, these ephemeral streams are not as well defined; none are mapped more than 

about a mile west of the contour line. 

• During one of the infrequent rain events in the area, it is anticipated that flow would be 

confined to the ephemeral stream beds where they are well defined, which could lead to a 

vertical rise in water levels and flooding concerns. However, once the flow leaves the 

well-defined drainage features, it will tend to spread laterally as it flows downhill 

(generally westward) to the salt basin(s) between the site and State Highway 54. This 

will reduce the vertical rise in water levels and reduce the impacts of flooding. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-33

Exhibit 4-10. Geologic Site Map 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-34

• None of the proposed site facilities is located within 0.8 kilometer (0.5 mile) of any of these 

three mapped ephemeral streams (see Exhibits 1-1 and 3-11). During the design and 

construction phase of the project, engineers and construction managers would evaluate the 

possibility for ephemeral flow in unmapped features during rain events, and ensure that site 

facilities are located away from areas that may be impacted by flooding. 

• Soil Erosion – Soil erosion due to surface water and wind would be of concern during 

construction. Approximately 308 hectares (760 acres) have the potential to be cleared and 

graded for construction. Construction activities would include road improvements, utility 

installation, site grading, installation of foundations and buildings, and landscaping. Best 

construction management practices would be employed to limit soil loss. These could 

include: 

 Soil stabilization (e.g., temporary and permanent seeding) 

 Structural controls (e.g., stabilized construction entrance, secured hay bales) 

 Management practices (e.g., construction sequencing, materials delivery sequencing, 

physical delineation of disturbed areas) 

 Topography – No significant impact on the site topography is expected from construction 

activities. Some disturbance is expected, but the facilities would be located on mostly 

flat terrain, which would minimize the impacts. 

4.8.1.2 Operation 

No disruption of underlying bedrock is expected during launch or landing operations. No impact 

to site seismicity is anticipated from proposed operations activities. No impact on topography is 

likely during operations. While localized flooding is possible from heavy rain events during the 

operations phase of the project, no significant impact is expected because site structures would 

be located away from areas prone to local flooding. 

Operations activities have the potential to impact site soils as described below: 

• Landing and Recovery Area – The landing and recovery area would be approximately 0.29 

hectare (0.72 acre) with a circular area a small circular concrete pad approximately 0.13 

hectare (0.32 acre). The immediate area around the landing pad would be cleared of 

vegetation to prevent the possibility of starting brush fires during landing activities. All of 

the soil in the landing and recovery area that is not covered by the concrete pad could be 

affected by the landing and recovery operations. Natural drainage would be rerouted around 

the concrete pad. 

• Rocket Propellant Combustion Byproducts – The liquid rocket motor propellant would be 

rocket propulsion grade kerosene and the oxidizer would be hydrogen peroxide. The 

expected combustion byproducts of the RLV include carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and 

water. No significant impact to site soils in the launch area or in the landing and recovery 

area are expected from these emissions. In the case of a spill or release of RP or any 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-35

hazardous material, the Emergency Response Team would begin the process of containing 

the material. If any HTP is released, it would naturally decompose to water and oxygen, 

presenting no impact to the environment. Uncontained RP or hazardous material could 

contaminate the soil at the release area. A licensed environmental firm would be contracted 

to conduct tests and, if necessary, remove any contaminated soil from the site. 

4.8.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permits or licenses would be issued, and no 

launch operations activities would occur and there would be no impact on site geology or soils 

from these operations. 

4.9 Socioeconomics (including Natural Resources and Energy Supply) 

4.9.1 Proposed Action 

4.9.1.1 Construction 

During the estimated twelve-month construction period, approximately 32 construction vehicles 

a month would be used on the site for clearing, construction, and outfitting tasks. During the 

second quarter year of construction, the average number of vehicles would increase to about 45 

vehicles per month. 

Employment and Income 

The construction phase would require a monthly average of approximately 45 FTE (full time 

equivalent) workers. The second quarter year of the construction phase would experience the 

highest number of FTE workers, approximately 70 workers per month. Virtually all the workers 

would have permanent residences outside of the ROI. From 1999 to 2003, the number of 

workers employed in Culberson County in the construction sector was too small to be disclosed. 

(BEA 2005) For the same period, the number of workers employed in the construction sector in 

Hudspeth County was minimal. In 1999, 2000, and 2003, the numbers were too small to 

disclose. In 2001 and 2002, there were 32 and 23 workers, respectively. Therefore, it is 

reasonable to assume that few workers within the two counties have the required skills. Some of 

the wages and salaries earned by these marginal (residing outside the ROI) construction workers 

would help to stimulate the local economy by creating a very small number of additional indirect 

jobs (food service personnel, service station personnel, casual entertainment employees, etc). 

Expenditures for goods and services to support the construction and building activities would 

generally occur outside of the ROI although merchants in the towns of Van Horn and Sierra 

Blanca would be expected to provide some construction materials. In addition, income taxes and 

sales taxes would be paid to the local and state governments. Taxes paid to the local and state 

governments would be beneficial because the government expenditures required to support 

construction workers (e.g., for schools, hospital care, etc.) would be minimal. The 2003 average 

per capita income was $16,482 ($7.92 per hour) in Hudspeth County and $15,522 ($7.46 per 

hour) in Culberson County. Wages for the skilled construction labor in the ROI is approximately 

$16 per hour, excluding benefits. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-36

Population 

Most of the current population in the ROI is less than one person per square mile, i.e., 0.3 person 

per square kilometer (0.7 person per square mile). Most of the construction workers would be 

marginal laborers (residents from outside of the ROI), but some local residents probably would 

be hired. As a result of this hiring from outside the area, there would be only a very small, less 

than significant, (much less than 1 percent) increase in population. The two-county ROI had a 

population of 6,027 persons in 2004 (Culberson 2,727 and Hudspeth 3,300) and has been 

experiencing an annual decline in population for the last decade. (USCB 2005) 

Housing 

Any increase in the demand for housing would be temporary. An individual worker could be 

employed on site anywhere from one day to several months at a time. Existing rental units, 

given the vacancy rate (8.4 percent in Culberson County, 18.8 percent in Hudspeth County), 

would be sufficient to satisfy any increase demand for housing. The estimated monthly average 

of 45 construction workers, with a peak of 70 workers for a single month, would not put 

additional demand on the housing in the area. It is expected that most of the construction 

workforce would reside in one of the fifteen motels or 4 RV parks in the town of Van Horn. 

Community Services 

Schools - Given the short construction period, the small number of construction workers, and 

the fact that most workers would come from outside Culberson or Hudspeth Counties, most 

workers would be expected to commute to the site on a weekly basis and leave their families 

at home. Thus, no impact on the school system, despite the small existing enrollment within 

the schools, is expected. 

Emergency Response Facilities - Because the number of construction workers is so small, 

workers are expected to be in area for a short time on their temporary assignment, and 

workers are expected to be in residence without family members, no impact on the existing 

medical facilities is expected. There are four medical centers/hospitals within 185 kilometers 

(115 miles) of the proposed Blue Origin site. The closest, and the one most likely to be used 

by Blue Origin personnel, is the Culberson County Hospital District in Van Horn. 

Natural Resources and Energy 

In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, the proposed action was examined to identify any 

proposed major changes in stationary facilities or the movement of ground vehicles that would 

have a measurable effect on local supplies of energy or natural resources. If there are major 

changes, power companies or other suppliers of energy would be contacted to determine if 

projected demands can be met by existing or planned source facilities. The use of natural 

resources other than for fuel need be examined only if the action involves a need for unusual 

materials or those in short supply. The proposed action does not create any major changes that 

would have a measurable effect on local supplies of energy or natural resources. The proposed 

action does not utilize unusual materials or materials in short supply. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-37

4.9.1.2 Operations 

Employment and Income 

Staffing for the operations phase of the proposed launch site is expected to be 20 to 35 full time 

personnel traveling to the site. The average wage rate for professional level support services in 

the ROI is approximately $12 per hour (McCoy 2005). The majority of the security and support 

personnel would be expected to be drawn from the local area. Additional employment 

opportunities created by the proposed action, approximately 20 to 23 positions, would have no 

impact on the employment statistics for the area. The proposed action would represent an 

increase of less than one percent (0.86 percent) in the ROI labor force. (BEA 2005; TTNUS 

2005) 

The airspace above and around the launch site is used by commercial and military aircraft. Prior 

to scheduling flight countdown activities, the FAA would consider and grant approval for 

exclusive use of the airspace directly above the launch site for a specific launch and recovery 

time window. Blue Origin RLV flight timelines project a total mission not to exceed 10 minutes 

in National airspace. Because the launch/recovery time window is so small, commercial flights 

and military patterns are not expected to be affected, so no negative economic impact on either 

entity, or to the economy of the area, is anticipated. 

Population 

Although unlikely, very small population increases could occur as a result of the operations 

phase of the proposed action. Professional support workers, hired from outside the area, may 

elect to permanently reside in the area with their families. In 2000, the average household size in 

the United States was 2.59. (USCB 2000) Assuming that 10 workers from outside the area 

would move to Culberson or Hudspeth County and bring a family, there could be a population 

increase of 26 people or 0.43 percent over 2004 population levels in the ROI, a less than 

significant change. 

Housing 

There would be no impacts on housing availability during the operations phase of the proposed 

action for the same reasons cited above. 

Community Services 

Schools - There would be no impact on schools from the proposed action during operations 

phase for the reason cited above. 

Emergency Response Facilities - No impact on medical services in the area is expected 

during the operations phase of the proposed action. The anticipated increase to the 

population base is less than one percent. There are four area medical clinics/hospitals within 

a 185-kilometer (115-mile) radius of the proposed action site. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-38

During launch operations, on site fire services would be provided by the Emergency Response 

Team consisting of trained Blue Origin personnel. In the event of a fire resulting from a launch 

vehicle crash, the Emergency Response Team would mobilize with an emergency vehicle and 

auxiliary water tanker to the scene. The Emergency Response Team would prevent the spread of 

the fire until it can be extinguished and summon off-site fire services for assistance if required. 

The Emergency Response Team would also be responsible to secure the accident site and initiate 

an accident investigation when all fire and explosive hazards have been mitigated. 

On site medical services would consist of an infirmary facility equipped to provide 

comprehensive first aid, resuscitation, and emergency defibrillation. Permanent launch site staff 

would be trained in first aid, and would summon assistance from off-site services as required. 

4.9.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permits or licenses would be issued and no 

launch site would be operated. Therefore, no new employment opportunities would be created 

from launch operations. There would be no change in population and no change to income 

within the ROI from launch operations. There would no change in the demand for public 

services such as schools, medical facilities, or public safety personnel in the ROI either. 

4.10 Traffic and Transportation 

Construction of the launch site and its subsequent operation would increase traffic in the region, 

especially on Highway 54. Impacts from increased traffic could potentially include air emissions 

from vehicle exhaust, noise, traffic congestion, road deterioration, traffic accidents, and exposure 

to hazardous materials following accidents. Methods for evaluating the impacts of vehicle 

exhaust are applicable to congested areas. Because the launch complex is being constructed in 

one of the most sparsely populated counties in Texas, vehicle emissions would not be addressed 

in this section. Section 4.1 addresses air emissions. 

4.10.1 Proposed Action 

4.10.1.1 Construction 

Highway 54 (see Exhibits 1-1 and 3-5) would be the road most impacted by construction 

activities. It is the only access to the construction site. As described in Section 3.8, Highway 54 

is an infrequently used highway. During the peak period of construction, 70 construction 

workers would be commuting to the site. The monthly average construction workforce is 45. 

Blue Origin intends to use a van pool to transport these workers from Van Horn to the launch site 

and back each day. In addition there would be approximately 4 to 6 daily deliveries of 

equipment, supplies, and building materials. Such an increase in traffic could create congestion 

and additional traffic noise of limited duration in Van Horn, but would not be expected to 

challenge the capacity of Highway 54 outside the city limits. Highway 54 is expected to undergo 

improvements at the beginning of 2006, so deterioration of the highway should not occur. If 

Highway 54 refurbishment occurs at the same time period as construction of the launch site, 

travelers on the highway could experience additional delays. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-39

The number of traffic accidents in Van Horn and on Highway 54 could increase. Applying the 

national 10-year average (1994-2003) traffic accident rate (BTS 2005) to an assumed 100 round 

trips between Van Horn and the launch complex yields approximately 4 accidents over one year. 

Approximately half of these accidents would be severe enough to cause an injury. 

Some small fraction (less than one percent) of the total trips would contain hazardous materials 

such as gasoline, diesel fuel, or compressed, flammable gases. If one assumes that the injury rate 

applies to accidents sufficiently energetic to release hazardous material and that one percent of 

all trips involves hazardous materials, then an estimated 0.02 accidents involving hazardous 

material releases would occur during the 12-month construction period. This rate assumes that 

the maximum trip rate continues throughout the year. 

4.10.1.2 Operation 

During facility operations, the commuting workforce would be approximately 23 workers. 

During launches, customers and other visitors would be visiting the site. Shipments of hydrogen 

peroxide (120 per year) and kerosene (20 per year) would be needed to fuel the RLVs. There 

would also be approximately 50 shipments per year of gaseous helium and nitrogen. Fifty-two 

shipments of diesel fuel would be needed per year for diesel generators. There would be other 

shipments of supplies and materials. However, the traffic from operations would be 

considerably less than that for construction. Existing roads would be well able to handle the 

traffic without congestion. 

The potential does exist for sightseers to crowd Highway 54 during launches. Recent private 

space launch attempts associated with the X Prize attracted numerous sightseers, in part due to 

widespread pre-launch publicity. Given the small population density and, remoteness of the site, 

and the fact that Blue Origin does not plan to actively publicize launch times, the Blue Origin 

site is not expected to attract as many sightseers as do some other launch sites. Nevertheless, 

Highway 54 may become temporarily congested if cars accumulate along the highway shoulders 

to observe launches. 

4.10.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permits or licenses would be issued, and as a 

result traffic on roads in Culberson County would not increase. Hazardous materials shipments 

would not increase. Therefore, environmental conditions at the proposed launch site would 

remain as described in Chapter 3, Affected Environment. 

4.11 Water Resources (including Wetlands and Wild and Scenic Rivers) 

Ground water resources at the launch site are described in Section 3.11. The discussion there 

demonstrates that there is sufficient ground water to support current and proposed activities in 

the area of the launch site and that the amount of water in aquifer storage would, at a minimum, 

be unchanged from present amounts in the year 2050. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-40

4.11.1 Proposed Action 

Potential effects of the proposed action on local ground water resources include aquifer 

drawdown, water quality impacts from site discharges, and changes in aquifer recharge because 

of site development. 

4.11.1.1 Construction 

Ground water from existing or new on site wells, if necessary, would be used to supply 

construction activities. Construction of launch site facilities and roads would require an 

estimated 5.7 to 7.6 liters (1.5 to 2.0 gallons) per minute continuous flow for a period of one 

year. TWDB well records indicate that all of the existing water-producing wells within the 

proposed site produce water from the Salt Bolson formation. Based on this information and the 

low flow required for this activity, it is expected that new wells would also be screened in this 

formation. Salt Bolson aquifer drawdown for the construction withdrawal would be 3.6 

centimeters (1.4 inches) at 9.1 meters (30 feet) from the withdrawal well (conservatively 

assuming withdrawal from a single well) after one year of pumping; the drawdown would 

decrease to 0.083 centimeter (0.033 inch) at 1,609 meters (1 mile) from the well. If it is 

necessary to screen new wells in the more productive Capitan aquifer, then the drawdown for 

construction withdrawal would be 0.57 centimeter (0.22 inch) at 9.1 meters (30 feet), decreasing 

to 0.087 centimeter (0.034 inch) at 1,609 meters (1 mile) from the well. Thus, the effects of this 

withdrawal on off site water use and, in fact, other uses on site, would be de minimis. Best 

management water control practices, including storage and control of liquids, would be 

employed for all construction activities in accordance with Texas State regulations. 

There are no wetlands or wild and scenic rivers in the ROI and therefore none would be 

impacted by the construction activities. 

4.11.1.2 Operation 

It is expected that two new on site wells would be used to supply construction activities, if 

necessary (see Exhibit 4-11). Average water use rates are expected to be approximately 5.7 liters 

(1.5 gallons) per minute. Although short term peak flows may be greater, aquifer responses 

would reflect long term averages. Salt Bolson aquifer drawdown, assuming double (11.4 liters 

[3 gallons] per minute) the expected average withdrawal rate is pumped from a single well, 

would be 6.8 centimeters (2.7 inches) at 9.1 meters (30 feet) from the well after 10 years of 

pumping; the drawdown would decrease to 1.0 centimeter (0.39 inch) at 1,609 meters (1 mile) 

from the well. If it is necessary to screen the new wells in the more productive Capitan aquifer, 

then the drawdown after 10 years of pumping would be 1.0 centimeter (0.39 inch) at 9.1 meters 

(30 feet) from the well, decreasing to 0.29 centimeter (0.11 inch) at 1,609 meters (1 mile) from 

the well. As described in the affected environment section, measured flow rates of some existing 

on site wells greatly exceed 11.4 liters (3 gallons) per minute. Thus, impacts of this water 

withdrawal on other possible on site and off site water uses would not be significant. 

An approximately 0.4 hectare (1 acre) pond located on the westward side of Home Base and next 

to the Power Generator Facility would receive an average of 3,407 liters (900 gallons) per day of 

particulate filtered wastewater from the central waste treatment plant. This flow is equivalent, 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-41

Exhibit 4-11. Proposed Locations of New Wells 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-42

for the given pond, to a flow depth of approximately one foot per year. Exhibit 4-12 shows the 

location of these facilities. With a gross lake evaporation rate of 2.1 meters (7 feet) per year and 

only 28 centimeters (11 inches) per year of precipitation, all of this flow would be expected to 

evaporate and evapotranspire. The launch site design would incorporate required water 

management methods for all building sites, parking lots and areas where a change in grading or 

ground cover has occurred as a result of construction. Launch site areas where potentially 

contaminated waste water or solutions may be inadvertently discharged would have fixed 

containment barriers. 

Launch releases are expected to be chiefly gases and water vapor. Any minor amounts of 

chemicals which may deposit on the ground would be dispersed. Any chemical released would 

not be expected to be transported to the water table because of the great depths from the surface 

to the water table and the lack of ground water recharge at the site. 

Approximately 90.2 hectares (223 acres) would be covered with impervious surfaces, such as 

concrete, asphalt, or pavement. Recharge of ground water in the area of the proposed site occurs 

around the margins of the basin and along channels of ephemeral streams. Because precipitation 

at the site does not recharge the ground water, no impact on ground water resources is expected 

from this change in ground cover. 

 

Section 4.2.1 noted that the USFWS requested the review of the potential for ground water 

development directly or indirectly associated with the project to impact springs in Jeff Davis and 

Reeves Counties that provide habitat for two federally listed fish species. The base flow to those 

springs is supported by the regional ground water flow system. Water from both Salt Bolson 

(Wild Horse Flats) and Capitan aquifers may supply some of this base flow. (Ridgeway, et al., 

2005) As detailed above, impacts of the water withdrawal supporting the proposed action for 

either on site or off site water uses would not be significant. This conclusion would certainly 

apply to the springs of interest that are approximately 80 kilometers (50 miles) distant from the 

location of the proposed action. Likewise, because site surface waters (e.g., pond, precipitation) 

are not expected to recharge the aquifer, no impacts on these springs would occur from site 

releases. 

There are no wetlands or wild and scenic rivers in the ROI and therefore none would be 

impacted by the operation activities. 

 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-43

Exhibit 4-12. Waste Treatment Facilities 

 

Exhibit 4-12.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-44

4.11.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permits or licenses would be issued and as a 

result there would be no impacts on ground water resources from launches or site operations. 

4.12 Airspace 

4.12.1 Proposed Action 

4.12.1.1 Construction 

All construction activities would use ground equipment without entering controlled airspace, and 

therefore construction activities are not relevant to analysis of impact on controlled airspace. 

4.12.1.2 Operation 

The proposed RLV would fly a vertical trajectory during both ascent and descent flight phases. 

During the flight, Blue Origin would track the IIP of its RLV in real-time and would terminate 

thrust immediately if the IIP departs from a pre-determined exclusion zone within the boundaries 

of the privately-owned ranchland. This steep flight ascent and descent profile in both nominal 

and off-nominal scenarios minimizes potential airspace conflicts. Therefore, air traffic within a 

7.4-kilometer (4-nautical mile) radius of the test pad has been examined using data provided by 

FAA Air Traffic Control. During the period December 12, 2005 to December 16, 2005, aircraft 

tracks through this airspace ranged from 102 to 129 per day. This traffic included both 

commercial and military aircraft. The Air Force has two low-level training routes, 1R 192 and 

1R 194, which are to the east and west of the proposed launch facility and pass within a 

6.4-kilometer (4-mile) radius around the proposed launch site. 

The FAA is charged with the overall management of airspace and has established certain criteria 

and limits for the use of various sectors of airspace. Airspace management is based largely on 

the number of aircraft that will be operating in an area, the nature of the operations conducted in 

that area and the level of safety needed to handle the air traffic. Any increase in airspace use can 

potentially affect the safety of aircraft and the health of people within the airspace. It also 

reduces the airspace availability to other aircraft. Blue Origin would consult with the FAA 

Southwest Region in developing a memorandum of agreement regarding coordination of 

airspace use. The agreement would address timing, methods of requesting and granting airspace 

use, and verification procedures. 

The proposed trajectories result in a total mission of less than ten minutes in national airspace. 

Prior to scheduling flight countdown activities, approval would be required from the FAA 

approval for exclusive use of the airspace directly above the launch site for a specific launch and 

recovery time window, which is anticipated to be less than three hours. During this window, it is 

expected that commercial flights would be rerouted and military flights would be rescheduled or 

rerouted. Blue Origin plans to ensure the airspace is clear by maintaining constant 

communication with Albuquerque Air Route Traffic Control Center during the flight operation 

and placing visual spotters on the ground during the operation to look for unauthorized aircraft. 

Except for its initial monopropellant prototypes, which are incapable of reaching an altitude 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-45

greater than 610 meters (2,000 feet), Blue Origin would also provide the Air Route Traffic 

Control Center with the ability to know the real time position and velocity of its RLV while 

operating in the National Airspace System. The specific Blue Origin and FAA arrangements 

related to airspace use will be addressed in detail during the safety analysis portion of the permit 

and licensing processes. 

Given the short window for need of exclusive airspace use, the infrequent launches 

(approximately once per week), and expected procedures for rerouting or rescheduling air traffic, 

the use of FAA-approved temporary restricted airspace procedures is not expected to 

significantly impact airspace use in the area. 

4.12.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no experimental permits or licenses would be issued and as a 

result there would be no impacts on surrounding air space as a result of launches or site 

operations. 

4.13 Environmental Justice 

4.13.1 Proposed Action 

The environmental justice analysis involved three steps. First, minority and low-income 

populations within the two-county region of influence were identified. Second, the impacts of 

the proposed action were assessed. Third, a review was conducted to identify any special 

considerations, such as unique exposure pathways or cultural practices that could contribute to 

any disproportionate impacts. 

Impacts on minority or low-income populations that could result from the proposed action and 

alternatives were analyzed for the geographic areas in which the proposed launch site would be 

located to determine if they are disproportionately high and adverse. Impacts related to the 

proposed launch site were analyzed within the census tracts surrounding the launch site and 

contained in the socioeconomic ROI (see Exhibit 4-13). 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-46

Exhibit 4-13. Census Tracts Containing the Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch 

Site and Contained in the Socioeconomic ROI 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-47

In this assessment, potential impacts arising under the major disciplines and resource areas 

including socioeconomics, cultural resources, air resources, water resources, ecological 

resources, noise, hazardous waste and materials, and traffic and transportation were reviewed. 

As described earlier in Chapter 4, no high or adverse impacts to any of these resources were 

predicted for the activities analyzed in this EA. Impacts in every instance were predicted to be 

small. Furthermore, no minority or low-income populations would experience 

disproportionately high or adverse impacts. 

Because impacts would not significantly impact the surrounding population, and minority or 

low-income populations would not be disproportionately affected, no disproportionately high 

and adverse impacts would be expected from construction and operations of the proposed launch 

site. 

4.13.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, experimental permits or licenses would be issued and no launch 

site would be operated. Therefore, there would be no disproportionately high or adverse impacts 

on minority or low income populations. 

4.14 Health and Safety 

4.14.1 Proposed Action 

4.14.1.1 Construction 

This section considers potential illness, injury, and fatality rates associated with construction of 

the launch site on the construction workforce. Health and safety impacts to workers were 

calculated using occupational injury, illness, and fatality rates obtained from U.S. Department of 

Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics data. 

The potential risk of occupational injuries and fatalities to construction workers would be 

expected to be bounded by injury and fatality rates for general industrial construction. Using 

BLS data for the five-year period from 1997-2001, Total Recordable Cases, Lost Workday 

Cases, and Fatalities were estimated for the number of construction workers for the duration of 

construction activities. These values are shown in Exhibit 4-14. The average monthly workforce 

for the construction period is estimated to be 45 workers, with a peak monthly workforce of 70 

workers. Construction contractors would employ standard measures to protect construction 

workers in accordance with OSHA regulations. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-48

Exhibit 4-14. Injury, Illness, and Fatality Estimates for the 12-month Construction Phase 

of the Proposed Launch Site 

Category Number of Cases 

Total Recordable Cases 3.8 

Total Lost Workday Cases 1.8 

Fatalities 0 

No chemicals have been identified that would be a risk to members of the public from 

construction activities at the proposed launch site. Construction workers would be protected 

from hazardous chemicals by adherence to OSHA and EPA occupational standards that limit 

concentrations of potentially hazardous chemicals. 

4.14.1.2 Operation 

During normal operations, total facility staffing would be approximately 23 persons. The 

potential risk of occupational injuries and fatalities to workers operating the launch site were 

estimated using BLS data for the five-year period from 1997-2001. Using these data, annual 

Total Recordable Cases, Lost Workday Cases, and Fatalities were estimated for site operations 

workers. These values are shown in Exhibit 4-15. 

Exhibit 4-15. Injury, Illness, and Fatality Estimates for Operation of the Proposed Launch 

Site 

Category Number of Cases 

Total Recordable Cases 1 

Total Lost Workday Cases 0.5 

Fatalities 0 

No chemical-related health impacts to workers or members of the public are associated with 

normal (accident-free) operations of the launch site. The facilities would be designed to include 

controls features to minimize worker exposures during facility operation. In addition to these 

controls, worker protection would be augmented by facility safety programs including work 

planning, chemical and industrial hygiene, personnel monitoring, and emergency preparedness. 

All accidents, safety incidents, and reportable injuries would be investigated by an on site team 

of Blue Origin personnel, directed by Blue Origin’s Safety Manager. The investigation team 

would enlist additional resources from Blue Origin headquarters staff in Kent, Washington as 

required. The purpose of the investigation would be to determine the root cause(s) of the 

accident/incident and implement corrective actions to prevent recurrence of the accident. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-49

There are no health impacts to members of the public (adults or children) from the operation of 

the proposed launch site. Therefore, the requirements of EO 13045, “Protection of Children 

from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” are not applicable to this action. 

4.14.1.3 Off-Nominal Operations 

As described in the proposed action under section 2.1.1.1, the New Shepard RLV would have a 

system for containing its impact dispersion radius to a sparsely populated area by initiating an 

abort in the event of an off-nominal trajectory or other anomalous condition. The New Shepard 

RLV would be capable of initiating abort autonomously if its flight computer detects a 

significant off-nominal condition in flight path angle, attitude, or other health condition. The 

ground crew would also be tracking the IIP of the New Shepard RLV through vehicle telemetry 

or other means of tracking the vehicle such as ground radar. For vehicles capable of leaving a 

pre-determined safe zone, ground crews can initiate abort if the vehicles IIP leaves the safe zone. 

During an abort, the crew capsule would separate, using small solid-rocket motors to safely 

recover the space flight participants. The abort module containing the solid-rocket motors would 

then jettison from the crew capsule. After the crew capsule departs, the propulsion module 

would attempt to steer back to the landing pad using aerodynamic surfaces and use its engines 

near the ground for a controlled, powered vertical landing. 

In the majority of foreseeable off-nominal scenarios, the crew capsule, abort module, and 

propulsion module would all land within the perimeter fence of the launch site. In some rare 

cases, the vehicles may land outside the fence line. However, in nearly all cases, the vehicles 

will stay within the boundaries of private land controlled by Blue Origin and present no danger 

to the public. In the unlikely event the vehicles impact outside the privately controlled Blue 

Origin land, the surrounding properties consist of extremely sparsely populated rangeland. 

During any landing away from the landing pad, the potential exists for crushing vegetation and 

animals as the vehicle touches down to ground, fire, and, for the propulsion module and abort 

module, the dispersal of unused propellant. 

Crew Capsule Off-Nominal Landing 

Wherever the crew capsule would land, its environmental impact would be limited as it would 

contain no significant quantity of flammable or hazardous material. The crew capsule would 

come down slowly under a parachute canopy with impact further mitigated by airbags, crushable 

structure, or some other decelerator device. 

Abort Module Off-Nominal Landing 

During abort system test flights, and in unlikely abort cases of commercial flight operations, the 

vehicle would fire small solid rocket motors to separate the crew capsule from the propulsion 

module. The abort module contains multiple solid rocket motors to provide the necessary 

impulse for safe separation and recovery of the crew capsule. 

In operations a jettisoned abort module would contain spent solid rocket motors, or a 

combination of spent and unfired solid rocket motors, depending on the flight conditions at 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-50

which the abort was commanded. Initial flight tests would explore the entire flight regime for 

abort cases and would therefore involve abort module impacts with all spent solid rocket motors, 

as well as cases where the abort module contains some live (unfired) solid rocket motors. 

The jettisoned abort module would be visually tracked and the impact location determined by 

triangulation. A locator system may also be installed on each abort module. The 

HAZMAT/Emergency Response Team would be dispatched to the abort module impact site to 

prevent the spread of any fire which results from contact of hot solid rocket motor cases or 

nozzles with combustible vegetation, or impact ignition of unfired solid rocket motors. 

The abort module would incorporate features to preclude the abort module from entering public 

property after jettison. These features would either preclude ignition of unfired solid rocket 

motors upon impact, or incorporate positive means to render the solid rocket motors 

nonpropulsive in the event of ignition at impact. These features would assure that debris 

resulting from aborted missions or abort system tests are contained within the boundaries of the 

launch site. Possible approaches include “soft” landing of the unfired solid rocket motors via 

aerodynamic decelerators, or providing massive vent area in the solid rocket motor cases via 

linear shaped charges initiated after abort module jettison. 

In the case where impact of the spent abort module results in a fire, the Emergency Response 

Team would stand off at a safe distance and prevent the spread of the fire while waiting until all 

residual solid propellant is consumed. 

In the case where impact of the spent abort module does not result in a fire, the Emergency 

Response Team would wait at a safe stand off distance until it is determined that a fire will not 

start (at least 60 minutes after impact). 

After the fire resulting from impact has burned out or after it is determined that a fire will not 

start, the Emergency Response Team would don personal protective equipment (fire resistant 

Nomex coveralls, gloves, airpacks, face shields) and approach the impact site to inspect for 

unburned solid propellant. Unburned solid propellant remaining after abort module impact 

would most likely consist of large fragments of the propellant grain, either bonded to fragments 

of the motor case, or loose on the ground. The Emergency Response Team would safely collect 

any remaining igniters or solid propellant fragments and transport them to a designated burn pit 

(impervious concrete slab/metal pan covered with sand) for disposal by open air burning. Any 

waste water resulting from propellant collection operations would also be disposed of by 

incineration in a manner that complies with all applicable regulations. Solid rocket motor 

case/nozzle/igniter fragments remaining after open air burning would be disposed of as solid 

waste. 

Propulsion Module Off-Nominal Landing 

Although the propulsion module would be designed to attempt an intact landing after an abort, 

there is a small possibility it would crash into the ground or tip-over if it does not land on the 

landing pad. In this case, there would be some quantity of propellant on-board that may detonate 

or deflagrate if the propellant tanks rupture. The quantity of propellant on-board decreases the 

further into the flight that an abort is declared. For an abort that occurs just after liftoff, the 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-51

propellants involved in detonation or deflagration would be nearly the full vehicle propellant 

load of less than 48,534 kilograms (107,000 pounds) mass of HTP and 5,897 kilograms (13,000 

pounds) mass of RP. If the crash results from an anomaly that occurs late in the flight after the 

vehicle has performed a nominal ascent and is approaching the ground for a powered landing, the 

propellant load would be approximately 3,629 kilograms (8,000 pounds) mass of HTP and 454 

kilograms (1,000 pounds) mass of RP or less. 

In the unlikely event of a propulsion module crash, a HAZMAT/Emergency Response Team 

consisting of trained Blue Origin personnel would be dispatched to the crash site to prevent the 

spread of any fire. In the event the crash results in a fire, the Emergency Response Team would 

stand off at a safe distance and prevent the spread of the fire while waiting until all residual 

propellant is consumed. 

In the case where impact of the propulsion module does not result in a fire, the Emergency 

Response Team would wait at a safe stand off distance until it is determined that a fire will not 

start (at least 60 minutes after impact). After the fire resulting from impact has burned out, or 

after it is determined that a fire will not start, the Emergency Response Team would begin the 

process of containing any unburned propellants and salvaging the vehicle. Any unburned HTP 

would naturally decompose to water and oxygen, presenting no impact to the environment. 

Uncontained, unburned RP may contaminate the soil at the crash site. A licensed environmental 

firm would be contracted to conduct tests and, if necessary, remove any contaminated soil from 

the crash site. 

4.14.2 No Action Alternative 

Under the no action alternative, no Launch Authorization would be issued and therefore no 

launch site would be operated. Therefore, there would be no change in the health and safety of 

workers or the off site population from launch operations. 

4.15 Cumulative Impacts 

This section summarizes the foreseeable environmental effects that could occur as a result of the 

proposed launch site and identifies other reasonably foreseeable impacts that could accumulate 

with these effects. In its regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National 

Environmental Policy Act, the CEQ defines cumulative impacts as follows: the impacts on the 

environment that result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (Federal or nonFederal) or person undertakes such other actions. (40 CFR 1508.7) 

As discussed in Section 3.4, most of the land within a 40 kilometer (25-mile) radius of the 

proposed launch facility is privately owned. This land includes working farms and cattle ranches 

and former ranch properties that are now leased to groups of hunters and managed for game 

species, primarily mule deer. The only industrial facilities in the general vicinity of the proposed 

launch facility are the Texas Architectural Aggregates Mine, approximately 8 kilometers 

(5 miles) to the west of the site, and the Delaware Mountain Wind Farm, approximately 16 

kilometers (10 miles) to the northeast. The Texas Architectural Aggregates Mine is owned and 

operated by Texas Aggregates Incorporated; the Delaware Wind Farm is owned and operated by 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-52

Florida Power and Light Energy. Because of the remoteness of the proposed site and the near 

absence of industrial activity in this part of Culberson County, there are no facilities in the area 

producing liquid or gaseous effluents of any kind, and no significant users of surface water or 

groundwater. The only federally-owned land in the area is Guadalupe Mountains National Park, 

which is staffed by a small number of personnel and receives a relatively small number of 

visitors each day, roughly half the number that travels to nearby Carlsbad Caverns National Park. 

Sections 4.1 through 4.14 analyze environmental impacts from constructing and operating the 

proposed launch site over the lifetime of the facility. The only past, present, or reasonably 

foreseeable future source of cumulative impacts (i.e., that could affect the same resources as the 

launch site) would be the operation of the marble mine in the Sierra Diablo Mountains resulting 

in traffic and transportation along State Highway 54. Other traffic along Highway 54 resulting 

from tourist traffic to Guadalupe Mountains National Park or Carlsbad Caverns National Park 

could also contribute to cumulative impacts. 

As discussed in Section 4.10, State Highway 54 is a lightly used roadway. An average of 180 

vehicles passes the area of the launch site each day on Highway 54. This total represents local 

traffic, workers at the Texas Aggregates marble mine, and travelers to Guadalupe Mountains 

National Park. Assuming one worker per vehicle, which is clearly conservative as some workers 

will share rides, the total number of vehicles using Highway 54 would increase to approximately 

320 per day (13 vehicles/hour) during the peak construction phase and to approximately 230 per 

day (10 vehicles/hour) during the operations phase. Increases of this magnitude would have little 

or no effect on local traffic and would not hinder the normal flow of traffic to and from 

Guadalupe Mountains National Park from Interstate 10. 

Another potential cumulative impact would be the additional traffic in the national airspace 

above the launch site. As described in Section 4.12, Blue Origin launches would compete for 

airspace with commercial and military aviation. Blue Origin would attempt to minimize this 

competition by appropriate timing of launches and coordination of overall air traffic with the 

FAA pursuant to a letter of agreement with the Albuquerque Air Traffic Control Center. 

No significant cumulative impacts would be expected from the implementation of the proposed 

action. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-53

4.16 References

Burchette, D. K. 1989. A study of the effect of balloon releases on the environment. Report 

prepared for Environmental Committee, National Association of Balloon Artists. July 29. 

Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). 2005. CA25N – Total full-time and part-time 

employment by industry and CA25 – total full-time and part-time employment by 

industry. Available online at http://www.bea.gov/ ; accessed January 5, 2006 

Culberson County Conservation Management Plan, 2000. Culberson County Groundwater 

Conservation District, Culberson County, Texas. Available at 

http://www.riocog.org/EnvSvcs/FWTWPG/GroundwaterPlans/CulbersonCGCDplan.pdf; 

accessed 15 August, 2005 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 1996. Environmental Assessment of the Kodiak Launch 

Complex, Kodiak Island, Alaska. Office of the Associate Administrator for Commercial 

Space Transportation, Washington, D.C., May. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 2001. Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement 

for Licensing Launches, Office of the Associate Adminstrator for Commercial Space 

Transportation, Washington, D.C., May. 

Golden, J., R. P. Ouellete, S. Saari, and P. N. Cheremisinoff, 1980, Environmental Impact Data 

Book, Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 

McCoy, J. 2005. Personal Communication with P.D. Baxter, Tetra Tech NUS, Van Horn 

Economic Development Office. August 12. 

Plotkin, K.J. 1989. “Review of Sonic Boom Theory,” Wyle Laboratories, published at AIAA 

12th Aeroacoustics Conference April 10-12, 1989, San Antonio, TX. Available from 

AIAA as paper AIAA-89-1105. 

Ridgeway, et al., 2005. “Diminished Spring Flows in the San Solomon Springs System, TransPecos, Texas,” Cindy Ridgeway, et al, State of Texas Grant Number WER69, Study 

Number 84312, May. 

SRS Technologies 1998. “Monitoring the Effects of Launch Noise on Pinnipeds and Southern 

Sea Otters, Taurus STEX Mission, SMC/TEV, Vandenberg Air Force Base, California,” 

Manhattan Beach, California. 

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) 2002. Needs Assessment for Commercial 

Management Capacity of Hazardous Waste in Texas: December 2002 Update, SFR034/02, available on the internet at: 

http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/comm_exec/pubs/sfr/034_02.pdf
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

4-54

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). 2004 Municipal Solid Waste in Texas: 

A year in Review, 2002 Data Summary and Analysis, AS-187/03, March. Available on 

the internet at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/assets/public/comm_exec/pubs/as/187_03.pdf

U. S. Census Bureau (USCB). 2000. People QuickFacts. Available online at 

http://www.census.gov./qfd/states/00000.html. Accessed May 10, 2005. 

U. S. Census Bureau (USCB). 2005. Table 1: Annual Estimates of the Population for Counties 

of Texas: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2004 (CO-EST2004-01-48). Available online at 

http://www.census.gov.popest/estimates.php. Accessed May 10, 2005. 

U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 1986, Programmatic Environmental Assessment of 

Commercial Space Launch Vehicle Programs, Washington, D.C., February. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1992. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission 

Factors, Fifth Edition, and Supplements. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1995. SCREEN3 Model. Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2003. MOBILE6.2 - Mobile Source Emission 

Factor Model. Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 

Visconti, G. 2001. Fundamentals of Physics and Chemistry of the Atmosphere. Berlin: 

Springer-Verlag, 2001. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

5-1 

5 MITIGATION 

As discussed in Chapter 4, there are no significant impacts from the proposed action, and 

therefore no mitigation measures would be needed. Nevertheless, Blue Origin plans to undertake 

mitigation measures to further reduce any impact from the proposed action. This chapter 

summarizes mitigation measures that Blue Origin would take to reduce or offset the potential 

environmental consequences of construction and operational activities. Mitigation measures 

described in the following sections include administrative or management controls and 

engineered systems that would be implemented through operating procedures. Further 

mitigation may be conducted in consultation with Federal and State agencies on an as needed 

basis. 

5.1 Air Resources 

During construction activities, water would be applied to disturbed areas for dust suppression. 

The cement batch plant would incorporate particulate control features such as the enclosure of 

conveyors and elevators, filters on storage bin vents, and the use of water sprays. 

5.2 Ecological Resources 

Blue Origin plans to add return-address labels to its radiosondes, so that anyone finding one after 

its launch may return it to Blue Origin. No other mitigation measures have been identified that 

would be specifically aimed at mitigating impacts to ecological resources. However, some of the 

mitigation measures intended to reduce impacts in other resource areas, such as dust suppression, 

would also serve to reduce impacts on plants and animals. 

5.3 Cultural/Native American Resources 

Actions to mitigate the effects of construction of the launch site on cultural resources would 

include: 

• Rerouting a perimeter fence to avoid site 41CU695; 

• Temporarily fencing site 41CU695 during construction of perimeter fence and firebreak; 

• Recovering data from two 2.3-meter (7.5-foot) wide strips along the edge of an existing road 

corridor through site 41CU696; 

• Implementing standard erosion control measures during all construction activities; 

• Educating all employees and contractors conducting construction activities regarding cultural 

resources in the project area, appropriate avoidance measures, and associated restrictions 

regarding vandalism and illegal artifact collecting; 

• Fencing or staking all construction areas during all construction activities to prevent any 

activities from proceeding outside of the approved construction area. Also, construction 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

5-2 

management and staff would be educated on the requirement that all activities must take 

place within approved areas; and 

• Stopping work if previously unknown cultural deposits are discovered during construction 

activities, ground-disturbing activities in the area would halt and a qualified archaeologist 

would evaluate the discovery. 

With the concurrence of the SHPO, mitigation activities related to the 9.5-meter (31-foot) wide 

road corridor through site 41CU696 have been identified and implemented. 

Actions to mitigate the effects of maintenance and operation of the Blue Origin launch site on 

cultural resources would include: 

• Permanently fencing the south entrance road through site 41CU696 at the 9.5-meter (31-foot) 

boundary, preventing any expansion of the road width within the site as a result of 

maintenance activities; 

• Educating all employees and contractors conducting maintenance activities regarding cultural 

resources in the project area, appropriate avoidance measures, and associated restrictions 

regarding vandalism and illegal artifact collecting; 

• Fencing or staking all maintenance areas during all ground-disturbing activities to prevent 

any activities from proceeding outside of the approved maintenance area. Also, maintenance 

management and staff would be educated on the requirement that all ground-disturbing 

activities must take place within approved areas; and 

• Stopping work if previously unknown cultural deposits are discovered during maintenance 

activities, ground-disturbing activities in the area would halt and a qualified archaeologist 

would evaluate the discovery. 

5.4 Hazardous Materials/Waste Management 

Possible actions to mitigate the effects of hazardous materials and solid and hazardous wastes at 

the Blue Origin launch facility include: 

• Taking advantage of all pollution prevention opportunities, 

• Recycling solid and some hazardous wastes to minimize the amounts generated, 

• Purchasing environmentally friendly products whenever possible, and 

• Maintaining appropriate site-specific clean-up materials. 

5.5 Land Use (including Farmland and Section 4(f) Resources) 

No mitigation measures have been identified that would be specifically aimed at mitigating 

impacts on land use. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

5-3 

5.6 Visual Resources 

Actions to mitigate the effects of construction of the Blue Origin launch site on visual resources 

include employing dust and soils controls at the access and egress points at Highway 54. 

No actions were identified to mitigate the effects of maintenance and operation of the proposed 

Blue Origin launch site on visual resources. 

5.7 Noise 

Construction contractors would employ standard measures to protect construction workers from 

noise in accordance with OSHA regulations. 

During launch operations, workers would normally be two miles away at the Operations Control 

Center. These workers would be unlikely to be exposed to sound levels greater than 115 dBA, 

the OSHA 15-minute standard. However, any workers potentially exposed to noise greater than 

any OSHA standard would be required to wear hearing protection. 

5.8 Geology and Soils (including Floodplains) 

Construction contractors would employ soil stabilization measures, structural controls, and 

construction management practices to reduce soil loss during the construction phase of the 

project. Soil stabilization measures would include grading and seeding disturbed areas with a 

native grass mix. Structural controls, which could include silt fences and secured hay 

bales/straw wattles, would be designed to trap disturbed soil and prevent its movement off site or 

into streambeds. Management considerations would include timing and sequencing of 

construction work to reduce the amount of time areas remained exposed to the elements (seeding 

areas and installing controls quickly) and clearly marking areas that are to be avoided or 

protected because they are eroding or are likely to erode because of slope or soil type. 

5.9 Socioeconomics (including Natural Resources and Energy Supply) 

No mitigation measures have been identified that would be aimed at mitigating impacts on 

socioeconomics. 

5.10 Traffic and Transportation 

During construction of the proposed launch site, Blue Origin plans to transport construction 

materials from both the North and the South of the proposed launch site, which will mitigate the 

total volume of traffic (from Blue Origin’s proposed launch site) in either direction on Highway 

54. Blue Origin also plans to van pool construction workers who are temporarily residing in Van 

Horn, Texas, to minimize impact on commuter traffic. Blue Origin does not plan to actively 

publicize launch activities, to minimize traffic from curiosity seekers. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

5-4 

5.11 Ground Water Resources (including Wetlands and Wild and Scenic Rivers) 

No mitigation measures have been identified that would be specifically aimed at mitigating 

impacts on ground water resources; however, measures taken to mitigate spills (Section 5.4) 

would prevent the movement of hazardous chemical into ground water. 

5.12 Airspace 

Any impacts to airspace would be mitigated by the use of FAA-approved temporary restricted 

airspace procedures that include mandatory horizontal and altitude separation safety standoff 

distances. Prior to scheduling flight countdown activities, the FAA would need to review and 

approve exclusive use of the airspace directly above the launch site for a specific launch and 

recovery time window. Blue Origin plans to enter into a memorandum of agreement with the 

FAA to coordinate exclusive use of the affected airspace, under which Blue Origin would 

schedule launches in advance and FAA would coordinate activates to maximize each party’s safe 

use of airspace. 

5.13 Environmental Justice 

No mitigation measures have been identified that would be aimed at mitigating impacts on 

environmental justice. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

6-1 

6 LIST OF PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS 

This list presents the individuals who contributed to the technical content of this environmental 

assessment. The preparation of the environmental assessment was directed by Gary Lai of Blue 

Origin and Philip Young of Tetra Tech. 

NAME: Douglas W. Graham 

AFFILIATION: Federal Aviation Administration 

EDUCATION: B.S. Mechanical Engineering, University of Oklahoma 

MBA, California State University 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Twenty years of USAF aerospace systems engineering 

experience; six plus years in NEPA regulatory compliance 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Government reviewer and manager of the NEPA process 

NAME: Michael Campbell 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech 

EDUCATION: M.S. Geophysics, Purdue University 

B.A. Geology, University of Tennessee 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Twenty years of professional experience in soil and ground 

water contamination, geologic, and hydrogeologic 

investigations 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Prepared Geology and Soils sections of Sections 3 and 4 

NAME: Steven J. Connor 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech 

EDUCATION: M.S. Physics, Georgia Institute of Technology 

B.S. Physics, “with highest honor,” Georgia Institute of 

Technology 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Thirty-one years of professional experience in scientific, 

engineering, management, and educational disciplines; 

provides environmental radiation protection and radiological 

transportation risk assessments and noise analysis 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Prepared Executive Summary, Traffic and Transportation 

sections of Sections 3 and 4, and Section 4 Noise 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

6-2 

NAME: David S. Flickinger 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech

EDUCATION: M.E.M. Natural Resource Economics and Policy, Duke 

University 

B.A. Biology/Political Science, Western Maryland College 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Seventeen years experience in the management of 

multidisciplinary environmental projects including NEPA 

documents, RCRA and CERCLA programs, projects, and 

reporting 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Prepared Land Use and Visual and Aesthetic Resources 

sections of Sections 3 and 4 

NAME: Elizabeth N. Hill 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech 

EDUCATION: Masters in Earth and Environmental Resource Management, 

University of South Carolina 

MBA, Business Administration, University of South Carolina 

B.A. Psychology and Social Science, Purdue University 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Six years of professional experience in environmental 

consulting for government and utility clients. Serves as a 

Regional Economist, analyzing socioeconomic impacts, 

environmental justice, and land use for government 

environmental impact statements and environmental reports 

for nuclear facility license renewal. 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Prepared Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice 

components of Sections 3 and 4 

NAME: Gary Lai 

AFFILIATION: Blue Origin

EDUCATION: B.S. Applied Economics, Cornell University 

B.S.E. Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering, 

University of Washington 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Seven years of experience in systems engineering and 

management of reusable launch vehicle and unmanned aerial 

vehicle development programs 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Provided technical information about the design and planned 

operation of the New Shepard Reusable Launch Vehicle and 

ground facilities used in Sections 2 and 4 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

6-3 

NAME: Steven J. Lanius 

AFFILIATION: Blue Origin

EDUCATION: B.S. Aerospace Engineering, University of Michigan 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Twenty-four years experience in the design, testing, and 

hazardous operations of solid and liquid propellant rockets, as 

well as test facility and ground support equipment design 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Provided technical information for hazardous material 

storage, handling, and spill prevention sections of Section 4; 

provided technical information on exhaust gas constituents of 

liquid rocket engines and solid propellant motors 

NAME: Anne C. Lovell 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech

EDUCATION: B.S. Chemical and Petroleum Refining Engineering, 

Colorado School of Mines 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Twenty years professional experience in air emissions 

controls and monitoring, Title V permit applications, Air 

Emission Inventory Calculations, and air monitoring at 

nuclear facilities and other commercial power facilities. 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Prepared Air Resources components of Sections 3 and 4 

NAME: Lisa A. Matis 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech

EDUCATION: M.S. Mechanical Engineering, Stevens Institute of 

Technology, 1989 

B.S. Chemical Engineering, Stanford University, 1984 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

More than 20 years of professional experience in 

multidisciplinary environmental programs in both operations 

and technical support capacities; specializes in hazardous waste 

management and RCRA compliance 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Prepared Hazardous Materials/Waste Management 

components of Sections 3 and 4 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

6-4 

NAME: Emily H. Mcree 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech

EDUCATION: B.S. Civil Engineering; Clemson University 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Seven years experience in environmental engineering and 

scientific support to commercial nuclear power plant 

environmental projects and U.S. Navy environmental 

investigation and remediation projects; supervises field 

operations and performs GIS analyses 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Prepared maps and graphics 

NAME: Philip R. Moore 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech 

EDUCATION: M.S. Wildlife and Fisheries Biology, Clemson University 

B.A. English, University of South Carolina 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Twenty years experience as wildlife and fishery biologist, 

assessing impacts of industrial facilities on water quality, fish, 

wildlife, and endangered species 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Deputy Project Manager, prepared Cumulative Impacts in 

Section 4, prepared Section 5 

NAME: James L. Oliver 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech 

EDUCATION: B.S. Biology (Fisheries), Murray State University 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Thirty-two years experience in research and impact 

assessment projects for the U.S. Department of Interior and 

DOE; reviews environmental and natural resource 

management issues and performs strategic planning for 

NEPA documentation for government and utility clients. 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Management Reviewer 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

6-5 

NAME: Katherine Roxlau 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech 

EDUCATION: M.A. Anthropology, Northern Arizona University 

B.A. Anthropology, Colorado College 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Fifteen years of professional experience in cultural resource 

assessment, management, and compliance studies, and 

preparation of NEPA documentation. 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Prepared Cultural/Native American Resources components of 

Sections 3 and 4 

NAME: Alan Toblin 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech 

EDUCATION: M.S. Chemical Engineering, University of Maryland 

B.S. Chemical Engineering, Cooper Union 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Thirty-four years experience in performing transport and 

exposure analyses for hydrologic and atmospheric 

contaminant transport in surface water, ground water, and air. 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Prepared Water Resources components of Sections 3 and 4 

NAME: Michael Whitten 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech 

EDUCATION: M.S. Environmental Science, Western Washington 

University 

B.S. Mathematics, University of Montevallo 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Seventeen years of professional experience in toxicology and 

ecology; terrestrial ecologist conducting ecological risk 

assessments and biological evaluations 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Prepared Ecological Resources components of Sections 3 and 

4 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

6-6 

NAME: Philip L. Young, CHP 

AFFILIATION: Tetra Tech 

EDUCATION: M.S. Health Physics, Georgia Institute of Technology 

B.S. Radiation Health (Health Physics), Oregon State 

University 

TECHNICAL 

EXPERIENCE: 

Seventeen years experience in preparing NEPA documents, 

environmental radiological analyses, accident analysis, public 

and worker safety and health, human health and ecological risk 

assessments, and contaminant fate and transport modeling 

EA RESPONSIBILITY: Project Manager 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

7-1 

7 AGENCIES CONTACTED 

Dr. James Bruseth, Ph.D. 

Director, Archeology Division 

Texas Historical Commission 

P.O. Box 12276 

Austin, Texas 78711-2276 

United States Fish and Wildlife Service 

Austin, Texas Ecological Services Field Office 

Compass Bank Building 

10711 Burnet Road 

Suite 200 

Austin, Texas 78758 

Mr. Alonzo Chalepah, Chairman 

Apache Tribe of Oklahoma 

P.O. Box 1220 

Anadarko, Oklahoma 73005 

Mr. Wallace Coffey, Chairman 

Comanche Nation of Oklahoma 

HC 32-Box 1720 

Lawton, Oklahoma 73502 

Mr. Jeff Houser, Chairman 

Fort Sill Apache Tribe 

Route 2, Box 121 

Apache, Oklahoma 73006 

Mr. Wayne Taylor, Jr., Chairman 

Hopi Tribal Headquarters 

P.O. Box 123 

Kykotsmovi, Arizona 86039 

Mr. Levi Pesata, President 

Jicarilla Apache Nation 

P.O. Box 507 

Dulce, New Mexico 87528 

Mr. Billy E. Horse, Chairman 

Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma 

P.O. Box 369 

Carnegie, Oklahoma 73015 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

7-2 

Mr. Mark Chino, President 

Mescalero Apache Tribe 

P.O. Box 176 

Mescalero, New Mexico 88340 

Ms . Naida Nachez, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer 

Mescalero Apache Tribe 

P.O. Box 227 

Mescalero, New Mexico 88340 

Ms. Ellyn Bigrope 

Mescalero Apache Tribe 

P.O. Box 227 

Mescalero, New Mexico 88340 

Mr. George E. Howell, President 

Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma 

P.O. Box 470 

Pawnee, Oklahoma 74058 

Mr. Robert Benavides, Governor 

Pueblo of Isleta 

P.O. Box 1270 

Isleta, New Mexico 87022 

Mr.Teofilo Pino, Governor 

Pueblo of Zia 

135 Capital Square Drive 

Zia Pueblo, New Mexico 87053-6013 

Ms. Kathleen Wesley-Kitcheyan, Chairwoman 

San Carlos Apache Tribe 

P.O. Box 0 

San Carlos, Arizona 85550 

Mr. Dallas Massey, Sr., Chairman 

White Mountain Apache Tribe 

P.O. Box 700 

Whiteriver, Arizona 85941 

Mr. Arlen P. Quetawki, Governor 

Zuni Tribe 

P.O. Box 339 

Zuni, New Mexico 87327 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

7-3 

Mr. Arturo Senclair, Governor 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo 

P.O. Box 17579, Ysleta Station 

El Paso, Texas 79917 
 

This page intentionally left blank.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

8-1 

8 DISTRIBUTION LIST 

Federal Agencies 

Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Dorko, Commander 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

Southwestern Division 

1100 Commerce Street 

Dallas, TX 75242-0216 

Van Horn Service Center 

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service 

100 East Broadway 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Robert Lawrence, Chief 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 

Office of Planning and Coordination 

1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200 

Dallas, Texas 75202 

Robert T. Pine, Supervisor 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Texas Ecological Services Field Office 

10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 

Austin, TX 78758 

Stephen Spencer 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Albuquerque Regional Environmental Office 

1001 Indian School, NW 

Suite 348 

Albuquerque, NM 87104 

National Park Service 

Guadalupe Mountains National Park

HC 60 Box 400

Salt Flat, TX 79847-9400 

National Park Service 

Carlsbad Caverns National Park 

3225 National Parks Highway

Carlsbad, NM 88220
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

8-2 

Native American Tribes 

Alonzo Chalepah, Chairman 

Apache Tribe of Oklahoma 

P.O. Box 1220 

Anadarko, OK 73005 

Wallace Coffey, Chairman 

Comanche Nation of Oklahoma 

HC 31-Box 1720 

Lawton, OK 73502 

Jeff Houser, Chairman 

Fort Sill Apache Tribe 

Route 2, Box 121 

Apache, OK 73006 

Wayne Taylor, Jr., Chairman 

Hopi Tribal Headquarters 

P.O. Box 123 

Kykotmovi, AZ 86039 

Levi Pesata, President 

Jicarilla Apache Nation 

P.O. Box 507 

Dulce, NM 87528 

Billy E. Horse, Chairman 

Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma 

P.O. Box 369 

Carnegie, OK 73015 

Mark Chino, President 

Mescalero Apache Tribe 

P.O. Box 176 

Mescalero, NM 88340 

Naida Nachez 

Tribal Historic Preservation Officer 

P.O. Box 227 

Mescalero, NM 88340 

Ellen Bigrope 

Mescalero Apache Tribe 

P.O. Box 227 

Mescalero, NM 88340 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

8-3 

George E. Howell, President 

Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma 

P.O. Box 470 

Pawnee, OK 74058 

Robert Benavides, Governor 

Pueblo of Isleta 

P.O. Box 1270 

Isleta, NM 87022 

Teofilo Pino, Governor 

Pueblo of Zia 

135 Capital Square Drive 

Zia Pueblo, NM 87053 

Kathleen Wesley-Kitcheyan, Chairwoman 

San Carlos Apache Tribe 

P.O. Box 0 

San Carlos, AZ 85550 

Dallas Massey, Sr., Chairman 

White Mountain Apache Tribe 

P.O. Box 700 

Whiteriver, AZ 85941 

Arlen P. Quetawki, Governor 

Zuni Tribe 

P.O. Box 339 

Zuni, NM 87327 

Arturo Senclair, Governor 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo 

P.O. Box 17579, Ysleta Station 

El Paso, TX 79917 

State and Local Agencies 

F. Lawrence Oaks 

State Historic Preservation Officer 

Texas Historical Commission, Executive Director 

P.O. Box 12276 

Austin, TX 78711 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

8-4 

Becky Brewster 

City of Van Horn, City Administrator 

P.O. Box 517 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Sally Carrasco 

Culberson County Appraisal District 

P.O. Box 550 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Oscar Carrillo 

Culberson County Sheriff 

P.O. Box 65 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Becky Dean Walker 

Hudspeth County Judge 

P.O. Box 68 

Sierra Blanca, TX 79851 

Russell Wyatt 

Van Horn Emergency Management Coordinator 

P.O. Box 754 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Libraries 

Van Horn City County Library 

c/o Ms. Letty Hernandez 

410 Crockett Street 

P.O. Box 129 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Media 

Alan Boyle 

MSNBC 

Building 25/N2 

1 Microsoft Way 

Redmond, WA 98052 

Ruth Campbell 

Odessa American 

P.O. Box 2952 

Odessa, TX 79760 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

8-5 

Stephanie Corley 

Big Bend Sentinel 

P.O. Drawer P 

Marta, TX 79835

Michael Graczyk 

Associated Press 

16945 Northchase, #240 

Houston, Texas 77060 

Natasha Loder 

Science Correspondent 

The Economist 

111 West 57th Street 

New York, NY 10019 

John McCormack 

Express-News 

8631 Post Oak 

San Antonio, Texas 78212 

Rachel Osver 

KRTS Marfa Public Radio 

P.O. Box 241 

Marfa, Texas 79843 

Larry Simpson 

The Van Horn Advocate 

P.O. Box 8 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Leila Walsh 

WOAI NBC News 4 

1031 Navarro Street 

San Antonio, Texas 78205-1321 

Public 

Bill Addington 

Sierra Blanca, TX 79855 

Ann Banta 

Van Horn, TX 9855 

Beth Braid 

Van Horn, TX 79855 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

8-6 

Kyle Brookshier 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Dora Collins 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Ed Craighead 

Dalhart, TX 79022

Edwin and Brent Easley 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Gary Fuentes 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Jack and Ruth Gill 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Tina Haby 

Fort Stockton, TX 79735 

Janet Helm 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Monica Hernandez 

Alpine, TX 79830 

Mike Jaeof 

College Station, TX 77845 

John Jones 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Ann Jones 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Matt Kilpatrick 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Charlie Lipsey 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Mick Lynch 

Dell City, TX 79837 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

8-7 

David McBirale 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

David McBirnie 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Jeff McCoy 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Kurt Ngmeth 

Van Horn, TX 79855

Beth Nobles 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

William Oliver 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Ignacio Paez 

Chihuahua, Mexico 33800

Anne Pemberton 

Van Horn, TX79855 

Brian Powell 

Alpine, TX 79831 

Jose Quintana 

College Station, TX 77845 

Shanna Roberts 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

David Scott 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Andy Skadberg 

Boyan, TX 77802 

Vivian Snyder 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Peter Stokely 

Austin, TX
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

8-8 

Misty Sumner 

Kent, TX 79855 

Joan Tatge 

College Station, TX 77802 

Sol Thomas 

Sierra Blanca, TX 79851 

Pete S. Torres, Jr. 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Chanley Turner 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Angela Wyatt 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Adelina Zamarippa 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Joann Carr 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

R.L. Davis 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Artaro Gonzales 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Ron Helm 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Eileen Rouke 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Whitney Snyder 

Van Horn, TX 79855 

Patricia Bell 

Salt Flat, TX 79847 

Gordon Bell 

Salt Flat, TX 79847 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

8-9 

Larry Brewton 

Dell City, TX 79837 

Billy Franklin 

Dell City, TX 79847 

Carmen Gentry 

Dell City, TX 79847 

Marcy Guillen 

Dell City, TX 79847 

Bobby Jones 

Dell City, TX 79847 

Martha Jones 

Dell City, TX 79837 

Mike Lafener 

Studio City, CA 91604 

Bonnie Larreau 

Dell City, TX 79837 

John Luclan 

Salt Flat, TX 79847 

Tom McMinn 

El Paso, TX 

Donna and W. Morrell 

Dell City, TX 79847 

Joel Muniz 

Dell City, TX 79847 

Robert Nightengaus 

Studio City, CA 91604 

Jennifer Nuholen 

Dell City, TX 79837 

Teri Page 

Dell City, TX 79847 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

8-10 

Rich Page 

Dell City, TX 79847 

Annette Snodgrass 

Dell City, TX 79837 

Janice Wobbenhorst 

Salt Flat, TX 79847 

DeAnne Page 

Dell City, TX 79847 

Chris Page 

Dell City, TX 79847 

Wayne and Susan Perry 

Dell City, TX 79847 

James and Mary Lynch 

Dell City, TX 79847 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

A-1 

APPENDIX A – PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING SUMMARY 

A.1 Introduction 

On June 14 and 15, 2005, Blue Origin, LLC (Blue Origin) conducted a series of information 

meetings in Van Horn, Texas and Dell City, Texas, to present its proposal to construct and 

operate a commercial launch facility in Culberson County, Texas. The meeting times were 

3:30 pm, 5:30 pm and 7:30 pm in the respective city time zones (CDT and MDT). Public notice 

of the meetings was made twice in both English and Spanish (once during the week of May 31 

and once during the week of June 6) in the following newspapers: The Van Horn Advocate, The 

Hudspeth County Herald & Dell Valley Review, and The Midland Reporter-Telegram. 

Blue Origin held the meetings to provide members of the public information on its proposal and 

to provide a venue for input on the scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the required 

Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in 

accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Blue Origin representatives 

made presentations on the company and its operating plans, and on the construction and 

operation of the launch facility. A representative of FAA’s Office of Commercial Space 

Transportation made a presentation on their regulatory role in the environmental approval 

process. A question and answer period followed each session and Blue Origin specifically 

addressed each of these questions in the development of this EA. It was emphasized (in each 

session) that a handful of jobs would be created and that growth in the area would be slow and 

steady. 

An attendance sheet was maintained by Blue Origin at each meeting session. The public was 

provided with two maps of the proposed project site and a summary of the project on poster 

boards in English and Spanish. Blue Origin also provided a session moderator, a stenographer, a 

Spanish interpreter and its environmental consultant to answer questions that arose during the 

presentation. The presentations were made orally and supported with computer generated 

materials or poster boards. Question cards were made available to the public to allow for written 

questions during the meeting or afterwards. The cards had the contact information of Mr. Doug 

Graham of the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation. In addition, printed versions 

of the Office of Commercial Space Transportation presentation were available to the public. 

The Notice of Availability of the Draft EA was published in the Federal Register on 

June 28, 2006 (71 FR 36870). The Notice asked the public to submit comments via mail, e-mail, 

or fax by July 27, 2006. The FAA hosted a public hearing on the Draft EA on July 25, 2006 at 

the Van Horn Convention Center in Van Horn, Texas. The hearing was preceded by 

announcements that ran in local newspapers (e.g., the Van Horn Advocate, the Hudspeth County 

Herald – Dell Valley Review, and the Midland Reporter-Telegram). More than 40 members of 

the public attended the meeting. The FAA provided a handout that contained facts about the 

proposed action and details on how to submit comments on the Draft EA. The FAA also 

displayed five posters with information about the impacts analysis in the Draft EA, a description 

of the launch site facility, a description of the NEPA process, details about the proposed action, 

and the required federal authorization necessary for the FAA’s license and permit process. An 

FAA representative made a presentation about their regulatory role in the environmental 

approval process and some of the basic information from the Draft EA. An attendance sheet was 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

A-2 

maintained at the meeting. A stenographer recorded the meeting and the comments provided by 

the public. 

Summaries of the meeting highlights by location are provided below. 

A.2 Public Information Meetings – June 14, 2005, Van Horn, Texas (58 attendees) 

3:30 pm Session (49 attendees)

This session was the most heavily attended of the six sessions held. The session moderator 

acknowledged the presence of selected public officials in attendance. Forty-nine persons 

representing the public were present for the meeting. Upon completion of the presentations 

questions were raised by four individuals: Ms. Adelina Zamarippa, Ms. Jo Kincaid, Mr. Bill 

Addington and Commissioner John Jones. Twelve questions were raised, the majority of which 

dealt with the potential socioeconomic impact of the project. Issues raised included population 

influx, taxes, infrastructure effects, and the operating life of the facility. Other questions were 

related to project funding, water use, the amount of pollution produced, quantities of fuel 

proposed to be stored on site, and the cost of a ride on the vehicle. Each question was answered 

by Blue Origin based on the current information available. In some instances, Blue Origin 

responded that the specific issue was being analyzed as part of the environmental assessment. 

5:30 pm Session (3 attendees)

The presentation format changed to a less formal “in the round” type format for the three 

members of the public that attended. No questions were asked following the presentations. 

7:30 pm Session (6 attendees)

The “in the round” type format continued for the six members of the public that attended. Upon 

completion of the presentations questions were raised by three individuals: Ms. Lois Flanagan, 

Mr. Arturo Gonzales and Mr. Ben Flanagan. Ten questions were raised. The focus of the 

questions was again primarily on the socioeconomic impact of the proposed project such as the 

impacts to traffic on State Highway 54, the construction bidding process, and the number of Blue 

Origin staff that would relocate to the area. Other questions were related to the potential impact 

of launches to wildlife, fencing around the facility, site flooding, water needs, and fuel storage. 

A.3 Public Information Meetings – June 15, 2005, Dell City, Texas (31 attendees) 

3:30 pm Session (24 attendees)

Twenty-four persons representing the public were present for the meeting. Upon completion of 

the presentations four questions were raised by Mr. Gordon Bell representing the Guadalupe 

Mountain National Park. He noted the importance of the National Park Services night skies 

initiative and asked if launches might be conducted at night. He also asked about the power 

plant that would be used, what type of fuel it would use, and whether emissions modeling would 

be done. Each question was answered by Blue Origin based on the current information 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

A-3 

available. In some instances, Blue Origin responded that the issue was being analyzed as part of 

the environmental assessment. 

5:30 pm Session (5 attendees)

The presentation format changed to a less formal “in the round” type format for the five 

members of the public who attended. Upon completion of the presentations three questions were 

raised and one statement was made by two individuals: Mr. Wayne Perry and Mr. (illegible first 

name) Perry. The questions were related to the length of time the Office of Commercial Space 

Transportation has been in existence and the other commercial launch facilities under its 

jurisdiction. In addition, a question was asked about the number of required public meetings for 

the Blue Origin project. Lastly, a statement was made about the development of the property 

that credited the previous owner of the land with being a good custodian. 

7:30 pm Session (2 attendees)

The “in the round” type format continued for the two members of the public that attended. Upon 

completion of the presentations a series of 12 questions were raised by Mr. James Lynch. He 

asked if the facility would be open to the public. Five of his the questions were related to Blue 

Origin’s business operations. He asked questions about the socioeconomic impacts of the 

project, the facility power source, water needs and if status reports would be periodically 

available related to the project. He also made the statement that the rural location of the facility 

would help protect the project. 

A.4 Public Hearing on the Draft EA – July 25, 2006, Van Horn, Texas (42 attendees)

6:30 pm

Forty-two members of the public were present for the meeting. Upon completion of the FAA’s 

presentation, four people provided oral comments on the Draft EA: Mr. Alan Boyle, Mr. Ron 

Helm, Mr. Pete Torres, Jr., and Mr. Robert Winmill. Mr. Boyle asked that a number of issues be 

analyzed further in the EA, including shipping methods, construction status, construction period, 

and financial information. Mr. Helm and Mr. Torres stated their support of the project. Mr. 

Winmill expressed concern over the transport and reprocessing of hydrogen peroxide.

 
 

This page intentionally left blank.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

B-1 

APPENDIX B – AGENCY CONSULTATIONS 

Copies of consultation letters between the FAA and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the

Texas State Historic Preservation Officer, and Native American Tribes are included in this 

appendix. A copy of the Memorandum of Agreement between the FAA, the Texas State 

Historic Preservation Officer, and Blue Origin is also included in this appendix.



MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT 

BETWEEN THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, 

THE TEXAS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, 

AND BLUE ORIGIN, LLC, 

REGARDING 

AVOIDANCE OF ADVERSE EFFECTS TO SITE 41CU695 AND 

MITIGATION OF ADVERSE EFFECTS TO SITE 41CU696, 

CULBERSON COUNTY, TEXAS 

WHEREAS, Blue Origin, LLC (BLUE), is proposing to construct a space launch facility 

in Culberson County, Texas, under a permit to be issued by the U.S. Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), and is therefore a federal undertaking subject to review under 

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; and 

WHEREAS, the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer (TXSHPO) and the FAA have 

determined that sites 41CU695 and 41CU696 are eligible for listing on the National 

Register of Historic Places in accordance with 36 CFR 800.4; and' 

WHEREAS, as part of constructing the launch facility complex, BLUE would re-route a 

perimeter fence and adjacent firebreak so that they would not run through archaeological 

site 41CU695; and 

WHEREAS, the TXSHPO and the FAA have applied the Criteria of Adverse Effect in 

accordance with 36 CFR 800.5 and have determined that re-routing the fence and 

firebreak would result in no adverse effect to site 4 1 CU695; and 

WHEREAS, as part of constructing the launch facility complex, BLUE would widen and 

improve an existing dirt road thatruas though archeolagical site 41CU696 - a lithic e : < scatter and camp site; and 

WHEREAS, the TXSHPO and the FAA have applied the Criteria of Adverse Effect in 

accordance with 36 CFR 800.5 and have determined that widening and improving the 

existing dirt road would have an adverse effect on site 41CU696; and 

WHEREAS, the FAA has sought public input and has identified parties entitled to be 

consulting partiesand, invited them to participate as such in the section 106 process in 

' I accordance Gith 36 C%R 80~.3(ej . I and (0; and * - '-. , L 1 1 

WHEREAS, the FAA, has made a reasonable qd good faith effort to identify any Indian 

tribes that might attach rkligious and cultural significance tb hiskc properties in the area 
. - ,I 

of potential effects and has invited them to be consulting parties in accordance with 36 

CFR 800.3 (f) (2); 

NOW, THEREFORE, the FAA, the TXSHPO, and BLUE agree that the following 

stipulations will be implemented by BLUE to avoid adverse effect to site 41CU695 and to 

mitigate the adverse effect to site 41CU696. 

STIPULATIONS 

I. Avoidance of Adverse Effect to Site 41CU695 

The original location of the perimeter fence and adjacent firebreak was within the 

boundaries of site 41CU695. BLUE rerouted the locations of the fence and firebreak to 

completely avoid this site, with a buffer of at least 100 feet between the site boundaries 

and the fence and firebreak. In addition, BLUE will temporarily fence site 41CU695 

while construction activities are occurring nearby to ensure no inadvertent impacts occur 

to the site. 

II. Mitigation of Adverse Effect to Site 41 CU696 

A. Data Recovery Plan 

The FAA and BLUE will develop a Data Recovery Plan ("mitigation plan") to mitigate 

the adverse effects on site 41CU696. The plan shall specify, at a minimum: 

The research questions to be addressed through data recovery, with an 

explanation of their relevance and importance; 

Data needed to address specific research questions, the likelihood that this 

data can be recovered and how the data will be analyzed; 

Fieldwork and analytical strategies to be employed, with an explanation of 

their relevance to the research question; 

Proposed schedule for the submission of progress reports to the FAA, 

TXSHPO, interested Tribes, and other consulting parties; 

Methods to be used in data management and dissemination of data, including 

a schedule; and 

Proposed methods by which interested Tribes and other consulting parties will 

be afforded an opportunity to participate. 
The Drafi Plan will be submitted by the FAA to the TXSHPO, interested Tribes, and 

other consulting parties for review and comment. All parties will have 30 days to review 

the Plan and provide comments. All comments will be considered and incorporated into a 

Final Plan as appropriate. Fieldwork to be conducted under the Plan will not commence 

until approval of the Final Plan has been received from the TXSHPO. 

B. Professional Supervision 

BLUE shall ensure that all activities carried out pursuant to the Plan are carried out by, or 

under the direct supervision of, a person or persons meeting, at a minimum, the Secretary 

of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for Archeology (48 FR 44739). 

However, nothing in this stipulation may be interpreted to bar BLUE or any agent or 

contractor of BLUE from utilizing the properly supervised services of employees and 

volunteers who do not meet the above standards. 

C. On-Site Visits by the TXSHPO 

The TXSHPO may visit the data recovery work in progress at any time. The TXSHPO 

shall be notified in writing by BLUE or its contractor of the proposed work schedule, and 

any subsequent changes in the work schedule, for the data recovery investigations to be 

conducted at 41 CU696. 

D. Recovery and Treatment of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects 

If human remains are discovered during data recovery activities, BLUE will notify the 

FAA, the TXSHPO and interested Tribes of the discovery as soon as practicable. In this 

event, the FAA and BLUE will prepare a Burial Treatment Plan that includes methods to 

expose, record, excavate, and temporarily curate the human remains and associated 

funerary objects. Religious leaders of any interested Tribes will be provided an 

opportunity to provide input to the Burial Treatment Plan, and to conduct the necessary 

ceremonial or religious practices before, during, or after the excavation. Consultation by 

the FAA with interested Tribes will occur to identify the long-term treatment of the 

remains and objects. In the absence of a request for repatriation hm a Tribe, human 

--- remains 

E. Curation of Artifacts and Records 

Because all collections will come fiom privately-owned property, materials recovered 

from site 41CU696 are privately owned. These collections will be curated at the Texas 

Archeological Research Laboratory until such a time that the landowner has the ability to 

store and care for artifacts at a level consistent with Texas Rules for the Management And 

Care Of Artifacts And Collections (Title 13, Part 2, Chapter 29 of the Texas 

Administrative Code), at which time any collections requested by the property owner will 

be returned to the property owner. However, human remains and associated funerary 

objects that are not requested by a Tribe for repatriation will be curated by the FAA at the 

Texas Archeological Research Laboratory. 
Under 36 CFR 79, associated records that are prepared or assembled in connection with a 

Federal or federally authorized prehistoric or historic resource survey, excavation or other 

study are the property of the U.S. Government. FAA shall ensure that, pending 

acceptance of the final data recovery report by the TXSHPO, all reports, notes, 

photographs, negatives, and processed data (tables, maps, etc.) are stored at the Texas 

Archeological Research Laboratory. All such materials shall be marked "Property of the 

U.S. Government". The FAA shall have access to all materials. 

F. Draft Reports 

BLUE shall provide 2 (two) copies of the draft report of the data recovery investigations 

to the TXSHPO, 1 (one) copy of the draft report to each of the interested Tribes and the 

consulting parties, and 1 (one) copy to the FAA. The draft report shall meet, in content 

and in form, the documentation standards in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and 

Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. - 

G. Final Reports 

BLUE shall provide 20 (twenty) copies of the final report of the data recovery 

investigations to the TXSHPO, 1 (one) copy of the draft report to each of the interested 

Tribes and the consulting parties, and 2 (two) copies to FAA (one of which can be 

submitted by FAA to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation). The final report 

shall meet, in content and in form, the documentation standards in the Secretary of the 

Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. 

H. Review of Draft and Final Reports 

Whenever any party to this Agreement is given the opportunity to review documents 

prepared pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, that party shall have 30 calendar days 

to conduct such review. Failure of a reviewing party to provide comments in accordance 

with this stipulation may be taken to indicate approval of the pertinent document by the 

reviewing party, unless a time extension is requested by the reviewing party and agreed to 

by the other parties to this Agreement. 

./ - 

I. Permanent Fence Along ~ccess Road in Site 41~~696 

Upon acceptance of the final data recovery report by the TXSHPO, a permanent fence 

will be installed by BLUE along the access road through site 41CU696. The fence will be 

installed by hand and located at 7.5 feet north and south of the existing access road edges, 

completely within the area subjected to data recovery excavations. The resulting fenced 

corridor will be 3 1 feet wide. Any construction activities to improve or widen this access 

road within 100 feet of the site boundaries of site 41CU696 will be conducted after 

installation of this permanent fence is completed. All construction activities to improve or 

widen this access road within the site boundaries of site 41 CU696 will be restricted to 

this fenced corridor to ensure no inadvertent impacts occur to the site. 

III. Dispute Resolution 
Should any party to this agreement object in writing to the FAA regarding any action 

carried out or proposed with respect to this undertaking or implementation of this 

Agreement, the FAA shall consult with the objecting party to resolve the objection. If 

after initiating such consultation, the FAA determines that the objection cannot be 

resolved through consultation, the FAA shall address the objection pursuant to 36 CFR 

800.7. 

IV. Term of Agreement 

The provisions and activities outlined in this Agreement shall be completed within 2 

years of implementation of the Agreement. If completion is not reached by this time, the 

FAA shall consult with the other signatories to reconsider and either amend the term of 

the Agreement or allow the Agreement to terminate. 

Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement by the FAA, the TXSHPO, and BLUE, and 

implementation of its terms, evidence that the FAA has taken into account the effects of 

the undertaking on historic properties. 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

n 

Date: $11 3/06 

TEXAS STATE HISTOF&fCPRESERVATION OFFICER 

. . 

Date: 

,.. . ' 

., -' , . 

j. 

: !*:1, . - ~ 

i i" ,?, , 

BLUE ORIGIN, LLC h: I, . . t; i, - 

.. - b 

-. 

By: 

s' 

Date: 7/7/06 







Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

C-1 

APPENDIX C – BIOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Baseline biological surveys were conducted at the proposed launch site in January and April 

2005. The purpose of the field surveys was to evaluate the project area as potential habitat for 

special status species, to record the presence of such species if they were observed, and to 

characterize vegetation communities and wildlife habitat. The surveys did not include the 

establishment of formal grids. Instead, vehicular surveys were conducted on all dirt roads at the 

site. Pedestrian surveys focused on areas of proposed project-related disturbance and areas 

identified during vehicular surveys as possible habitat for rare or unusual species. Other areas 

were selected for pedestrian surveys based on a review of soil maps, topographic maps, and 

aerial photographs. 

C.1 Vegetation 

Preliminary determinations of site vegetation types were made using United States Geological 

Survey (USGS) color aerial digital orthophotos with one-meter accuracy. Ground truthing of 

vegetation community delineation was conducted in April 2005 using the aforementioned 

vehicular and pedestrian surveys. Approximate boundaries of vegetation communities were 

digitally mapped (Figure C-1) based on the reconnaissance surveys, digital orthophotos, 

topography, and soil associations. Vegetation communities were classified based on DickPeddie (1993), which describes plant communities of New Mexico as well as the Trans-Pecos 

region of Texas and the project area. 

The project area is located within the Chihuahuan Desert, which is the largest of the four North 

American deserts. Most of the Chihuahuan Desert is in Mexico, but northward fingers extend 

along the Rio Grande and Pecos rivers into portions of Texas and New Mexico. The general 

vegetation community known as Chihuahuan Desert Scrub encompasses the project area. 

Overgrazing, climate change, and fire suppression have extended this vegetation community type 

northward over the last 100 to 250 years into areas previously characterized as grasslands (DickPeddie 1993). Creosote (Larrea tridentata) and tarbush (Flourensia cernua) are co-dominant 

indicator species of Chihuahuan Desert Scrub. Located in the Salt Basin, the proposed project 

area is situated within the basin formed by the Sierra Diablo Mountains on the west and the 

Delaware Mountains on the east. Gently sloping alluvial fans dominate the eastern portion of the 

site, draining to the west. A northwest-to-southeast trending gypsum ridge ranging from 

approximately 1.7 to 8.3 meters (five to 25 feet) in height is located in the west-central portion of 

the site and overlooks a large similarly aligned depression to the west. 

Five subsets of Chihuahuan Desert Scrub vegetation community occur within the project area. 

• Creosote bush 

• Sacaton 

• Grama grass 

• Gyposphilic 

• Arroyo Riparian 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

C-2 

Exhibit C-1. Vegetation Communities 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

C-3 

The distribution of these community types is based on edaphic and topographical features. (DickPeddie 1993) These community types are not contiguous or all-inclusive, and thus create a 

mosaic pattern of distribution resulting from minor variations in topography and soil types. In 

some respects, the site vegetative communities are characteristic of transitional zones with 

blurred distinctions. Therefore, large areas of vegetation types illustrated on Figure C-1 also 

contain smaller inclusions of different community types. Given the relatively large size of the 

proposed site and the many transitional zones, these inclusions are too small to accurately map. 

Descriptions of each community type are provided below. 

The creosote bush community comprises the majority of vegetation within the proposed project 

area, and encompasses nearly three quarters of the site. The community is dominated by 

creosote, and the presence of soaptree yucca (Yucca elata) and fluff grass (Erioneuron 

pulchellum = Dasyochloa pulchellum) with minimal tarbush occurrence indicates recent (within 

the past 150 years) grassland succession. (Dick-Peddie 1993) Within the project area, this 

community encompasses some areas that could be characterized as desert grassland shrub-mixed 

grass community, based on the presence of creosote, black grama (Bouteloua eripoda), fluff 

grass, and bush muhly (Muhlenbergia porteri). However the two community types are so 

intermingled that accurate identification and absolute separation is beyond the scope of this 

document. 

Topographically the creosote bush community coincides with gently sloped alluvial fans and 

level expanses. Soil texture ranges from silt loam to sandy loam with large sandy gravelly loam 

areas. Black to gray colored cryptobiotic crusting is present with an estimated 15 percent cover. 

Nominal areas of silty to sandy loams support tarbush and honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa) 

as co-dominants with creosote. In general, vegetation cover was visually estimated to range 

from an average of 35 to 45 percent, with creosote typically comprising 40 percent of total cover. 

Frequent thick patches of tobosa (Hilaria mutica) are interspersed with areas of nearly barren 

ground. Other major grass species include fluff grass, alkali sacaton (Sporobolus airoides), 

burro grass (Scleropogon brevifolius) and black grama (Bouteloua eripoda). A number of early 

annual forbs such as bladderpod (Lesquerella fendleri), pepper grass (Lepidium montanum), 

scorpion weed (Phacelia coerulea and P. integrifolia), blanket flower (Gaillardia pinnatafida), 

purple mat (Nama hispidum) and verbena (Verbena bracteata) comprise the shrub understory. 

Desert holly (Perezia nana), prickly pear (Opuntia polyacantha and O. phaeacantha), Mormon 

tea (Ephedra trifurca), Christmas cactus (O. leptocaulis), and allthorn (Koeberlinia spinosa) are 

associative community species. 

The sacaton community occurs in poorly drained saline, calcareous clay loam soils prevalent 

along the western-southwestern edge of the site, and in one relatively large area in the central 

portion of the site. These flat areas are interspersed with swales and are characterized by alkali 

sacaton and four-winged saltbush (Atriplex canescens) intermixed with patches of burro grass, 

fluff grass, tobosa, and threeawn (Aristida sp.). Overall vegetative cover ranges between 20 to 

50 percent, with the lowest coverage occurring in areas dominated by low-growing burro grass. 

This community type is moderately diverse with peppergrass, bladderpod, verbena, scorpion 

weed, prickly pear, and thistle (Cirsium neomexicana and Carduus nutans) established on soils 

with less clay content and coarser textures. Succulent or shrubby species are represented by 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

C-4 

widely scattered mesquite, cholla (Opuntia imbricata), soaptree yucca, Torrey yucca (Y. torreyi) 

and broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae). 

The grama grass community is characterized by black grama being the dominant grass species. 

In the project area, these grasslands have an estimated cover of 40 to 45 percent, and also sustain 

alkali sacaton, tobosa and burro grass. Depending on the grassland successional stage, shrub 

cover ranges from 25 to 40 percent of total cover and includes creosote, honey mesquite and 

tarbush. Annual forbs are represented by peppergrass, bladderpod, blanket flower, chinch weed 

(Pectis papposa), goldenweed (Machaeranthera gracilis), and spectacle pod (Dithyrea 

wislizenii). 

The linear gypsum ridge in the west-central portion of the site supports the Gypsophilic 

community type. The ridge surface layer is composed of rocky consolidated limestone with 

presumably high levels of calcium carbonate and calcium sulfate in surface soils. Highly crusted 

dark cryptobiotic soils cover approximately 30 to 35 percent of the ridge. The Gypsophilic 

community is the least diverse in the project area; it contains few species, and the vegetative 

ground cover is only about 15 percent. Hairy coldenia (Tiquilia hispidissima), alkali sacaton, 

allthorn, soaptree yucca, evening primrose (Oenothera missouriensis), bush muhly 

(Muhlenbergia porteri), and stickleaf (Mentzilia albicaulis) are the primary plant species. 

Arroyo riparian vegetation within the project area is uncommon and occurs only near man-made 

arroyos and impoundments. There are no naturally occurring surface waters within the site, nor 

any true riparian vegetation communities. Thus, the arroyo vegetation communities at the site 

have been termed “pseudo-riparian.” These communities encompass small circular areas around 

former livestock ponds and tanks or thin linear swales along ephemeral drainages. Although 

water is no longer pumped to these ponds and tanks, they apparently hold water after rains and 

tend to be more lushly vegetated than surrounding areas. The psuedo-riparian areas have basal 

and canopy cover up to one hundred percent in some patches. With the additional soil moisture, 

the dominant plant species exhibit greater stature and density than elsewhere within the site, and 

form a noticeably different vegetation type. This community type is dominated by large honey 

mesquite typically exceeding fifteen feet in height and eight inches diameter at breast height, 

sumac (Rhus microphyllum), desert willow (Chilopsis linearis) and thick, tall, bunch stands of 

alkali sacaton. Virgin’s bower (Clematis drummondii), buffalo gourd (Cucurbita foetidissima), 

and the non-native saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), are minor components of the pseudo-arroyo 

community. 

C.2 Wildlife 

C.2.1 Birds 

At least 482 bird species have been recorded in the Trans-Pecos region of Texas (Peterson 2003); 

many of these could potentially occur in the project area. Bird species observed during the April 

2005 biological survey included Western kingbird (Tyrannus verticalus), red-tailed hawk (Buteo 

jamaicensis), Swainson’s hawk (B. swainsoni), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), American 

kestrel (Falco sparverius), Western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), ladder-back 

woodpecker (Picoides scalaris), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), common raven 

(Corvus corax), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), greater roadrunner (Geococcyx californianus), 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

C-5 

mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), Northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), brown towhee 

(Pipilo fuscus), horned lark (Eremophila alpestris), Western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta), 

pyrrhuloxia (Cardinalis sinuatus), scaled quail (Callipepla squamata), cactus wren 

(Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus), long-billed curlew (Numenius americanus), yellow-headed 

blackbird (Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus), lark bunting (Calamospiza melanocorys) and 

several sparrow species. Some of these are year-round residents of the Trans-Pecos region (e.g., 

raven, scaled quail) while others are present only during seasonal migrations (e.g., yellowheaded blackbird, long-billed curlew) or only during the breeding season (e.g., Western 

kingbird). Wintering birds had vacated the project area by the time of the late-April 2005 

survey. Bird species observed during the January 2005 survey were those that either winter in 

the area or use the area year-round, and included the Swainson’s hawk, American kestrel, 

loggerhead shrike, common raven, greater roadrunner, Northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), 

Western meadowlark, pyrrhuloxia, and great horned owl (Bubo virginianus). The above list of 

birds seen during the January and April surveys is not intended to be a complete list of all birds 

that occur at the site. Other birds such as thrashers (Toxostoma spp.), flycatchers (Empidonax 

spp.), various wrens and other birds undoubtedly occur in the project area. 

No active nests were observed in the project area during the April 2005 survey, but a long-eared 

owl (Asio otus) was observed on an active nest slightly beyond the boundary of the project area, 

and Western burrowing owls (apparent breeding pairs) were observed at two prairie dog colonies 

that are within or immediately adjacent to the site. A pair of Swainson’s hawks was sighted 

soaring over the eastern portion of the site. Raptor and/or raven nests used during previous 

breeding seasons (sometimes containing bones of small mammals) were observed in many of the 

larger mesquite trees within the project area. Several old cactus wren nests were noted in 

soaptree yuccas and Torrey yuccas. 

C.2.2 Mammals 

The Chihuahuan Desert is home to a number of mammalian species, though large predators are 

limited by the naturally harsh conditions. Mammals observed during biological surveys included 

coyotes (Canis latrans), pronghorn “antelope” (Antilocapra americana), chipmunks (Eutamias 

sp.), black-tailed prairie dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus), and numerous black-tailed jackrabbits 

(Lepus californicus) and desert cottontails (Sylvilagus aududoni). Burrows, scat, and/or other 

evidence of badger (Taxidea taxus), pocket gophers, and collared peccary (Tayassu tajacu) were 

observed during one or both surveys. 

A small cave located along the eastern side of the limestone ridge in the west-central portion of 

the surveyed site contained a small colony of bats during the April 2005 survey. The bats 

appeared to be cave myotis (Myotis velifer), which is a common bat species in the Trans-Pecos 

region of Texas. A positive identification was not possible. 

Two black-tailed prairie dog colonies occur in the vicinity of the project area. The larger of the 

two colonies is located slightly outside the northwest boundary of the project area. The colony 

covers approximately 20 to 25 acres, and the eastern edge of the colony is approximately 600 

feet west of the project area’s western boundary. The other prairie dog colony is located in the 

southeastern portion of the project area within the sacaton vegetation community, and covers 

approximately 8-10 acres. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

C-6 

C.2.3 Reptiles and Amphibians 

Numerous snakes and lizards inhabit the Trans-Pecos region. Few snakes in the region are 

diurnal; most avoid the heat of the sun and are nocturnal, prowling during darkness. No reptiles 

or amphibians were observed during the January 2005 survey, which was not surprising because 

they hibernate during the winter. The little striped whiptail lizard (Cnemidophorus inornatus) 

was commonly seen throughout the site during the April survey. One bull snake (Pituophis 

melanoleuca sayi) and one prairie rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis viridis) were observed within the 

project area during the April 2005 survey, but no amphibians were observed. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-1 

APPENDIX D - RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 

In accordance with NEPA and the implementing regulations of CEQ (40 CFR 1500- 

1508) the FAA initiated a public review and comment period for the Draft EA for the Blue 

Origin West Texas Spaceport. Nine comment documents were received during the Draft EA 

comment period. Comment documents received from cooperating agencies and from other lines 

of business within the FAA are not included in this appendix, but were addressed in the Final EA 

where appropriate. 

Several of the comment documents contained a comment on more than one issue. Therefore, in 

this appendix the FAA has reproduced the full text of each comment document as provided by 

the commenter. No changes were made to the comment document to correct for grammatical or 

spelling errors. Where appropriate, specific comments within the comment document have been 

identified and reproduced to allow for a specific response by the FAA. 

Exhibit D-1 below provides a summary of the comment documents received during the comment 

period for the Draft EA. The FAA’s responses to these comments appear in the order the 

comment documents are listed in this exhibit. Individual comments are denoted by a dash and 

the comment number, i.e., M004-1 is the first comment within comment document M004. 

Exhibit D-1. Summary of the Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment 

Name Organization Comment Method Date 

Authored 

Comment 

Number 

Ms. Francis 

Morris 

The Pawnee Nation of 

Oklahoma 

E-mail 

6/30/2006 E001 

Mr. Lloyd H. 

Woosley, Jr. 

U.S. Geological 

Survey E-mail 7/20/2006 E002 

Ms. Janet G. 

Helm and Mr. 

Ron Helm 

Private Citizens Fax 7/21/2006 F001 

Mr. Ian 

Twombly 

Aircraft Owners and 

Pilots Association Mail 7/26/2006 M001 

Ms. Lorene 

Willis 

The Jicarilla Apache 

Nation Mail 7/24/2006 M002 

Mr. Alan Boyle MSNBC 

Oral comment 

received at public 

hearing 

7/25/2006 PHO001 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-2 

Name Organization Comment Method Date 

Authored 

Comment 

Number 

Mr. Ron Helm Private Citizen 

Oral comment 

received at public 

hearing 

7/25/2006 PHO002 

Mr. Pete S. 

Torres, Jr. Private Citizen 

Oral comment 

received at public 

hearing 

7/25/2006 PHO003 

Mr. Robert 

Winmill Space Institute 

Oral comment 

received at public 

hearing 

7/25/2006 PHO004 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-3 

D.1 Ms. Francis Moore, The Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma 

D.1.1 Comment Document E001 

FAA Response to Comment Document E001: Thank you for your comment. As 

requested, if any human remains and/or objects falling under NAGPRA or NHPA are 

discovered during construction, all activities would stop and the appropriate authorities 

would be contacted. In addition, an MOA (see Appendix B) was developed by the FAA, 

the Texas SHPO, and Blue Origin that describes the measures that are to be taken 

regarding avoidance or mitigation of impacts on historic properties as a result of the 

proposed action. The MOA was signed on July 17, 2006. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-4 

D.2 Mr. Lloyd H. Woosley, Jr., U.S. Geological Survey 

D.2.1 Comment Document E002 

FAA Response to Comment Document E002: Thank you for your comment.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-5 

D.3 Ms. Janet G. Helm and Mr. Ron Helm, Private Citizens 

D.3.1 Comment Document F001 

FAA Response to Comment Document F001: Thank you for your comment.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-6 

D.4 Mr. Ian Twombly, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-7 

D.4.2 Comment M001-1 

AOPA recognizes the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has a congressional mandate to 

ensure that commercial space launches provide a sufficient level of safety for all users of the 

NAS. However, this mandate does not justify or require temporary or permanent flight 

restrictions. 

FAA Response to Comment M001-1: As stated by the commenter the FAA has a 

congressional mandate to ensure protection of the public, property, and the national 

security and foreign policy interests of the U.S. during a commercial launch or re-entry 

activity and to encourage, facilitate, and promote U.S. commercial space transportation. 

To fulfill this mission, the FAA determines what actions are necessary during 

commercial launches to ensure an adequate margin of safety. These actions may include 

temporary or in some instances permanent flight restrictions. As stated in the EA, the 

FAA anticipates that this proposed action and the limited number of launches associated 

with it would only require temporary flight restrictions. As noted in Section 4.12.1.2, 

Blue Origin would consult with the FAA Southwest Region in developing a 

memorandum of agreement regarding coordination of airspace use. The agreement 

would address timing, methods of requesting and granting airspace use, and verification 

procedures.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-8 

D.4.2 Comment M001-2 

AOPA encourages the FAA to more aggressively examine ways in which commercial space 

transportation can occur seamlessly within the NAS. Considering a majority of the proposed 

launch vehicles will simply be altered version of certified aircraft, the FAA should reasonably be 

able to provide standard separation services for non-participating aircraft. 

FAA Response to Comment M001-2: All proposed launch activities occurring at the 

spaceport would need to be conducted in accordance with established airspace 

agreements and in coordination with the Air Route Traffic Control Center. Therefore, the 

FAA will be able to effectively ensure that commercial space transportation can occur 

within the NAS. The FAA has staff dedicated to addressing all airspace issues associated 

with commercial space launches as well as general aviation. The FAA plans to provide 

separation services for non-participating aircraft under their control. For aircraft not 

under the direct control of Air Traffic Control, appropriate Notices to Airmen 

(NOTAMs) will be issued to advise them of any potential hazardous operations. 

D.4.3 Comment M001-3 

With up to 129 operations over the launch site per day, it is clear that restricting access to the 

airspace around the launch site would be a major impact to GA operations. Considering the 

large impact to GA operations, the relatively short mission duration of only 10 minutes, and the 

predictable flight path, TFRs are not an appropriate mechanism by which to conduct the 

commercial spaceflights at the Blue Origin Commercial Launch Site. Instead, AOPA 

recommends establishing an Alert Area over the launch site to protect non-participating aircraft. 

According to FAA guidance, an Alert Area can exist for any unusual type of aeronautical 

activity. Because each launch will be closely monitored by both ground personnel at the launch 

site and air traffic control radar, an alert area is more than adequate to protect other aircraft in the 

area. A charted alert area in combination with the proper notification of pilots through the 

standard notice to airmen (NOTAM) system will ensure that GA traffic stays a safe distance 

from the launch area. AOPA encourages the FAA to examine alternatives to TFRs for 

commercial space launches. Alert areas and standard NOTAMS would keep both pilots and 

commercial space launch participants safe while allowing for full and equal airspace access for 

all NAS users. 

FAA Response to Comment M001-3: As discussed in Section 4.12.1.2, Blue Origin 

would consult with the FAA Southwest Region in developing a memorandum of 

agreement regarding coordination of airspace use. The agreement would address timing, 

methods of requesting and granting airspace use, and verification procedures. Blue 

Origin plans to ensure the airspace is clear by maintaining constant communication with 

Albuquerque Air Route Traffic Control Center during flight operation and by placing 

visual spotters on the ground during the operation to look for unauthorized aircraft. 

Given the short window for need of exclusive airspace use, the infrequent launches 

(approximately one per week), and expected procedures for rerouting or rescheduling air 

traffic, the use of TFRs is the preferred method of ensuring safety. See 14 CFR 91.143, 

Temporary Flight Restriction, Flight limitation in the proximity of space flight 

operations.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-9 

D. 5 Ms. Lorene Willis, The Jicarilla Apache Nation 

D.5.1 Comment Document M002 

FAA Response to Comment Document M002: Thank you for your comment.
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-10 

D.6 Mr. Alan Boyle, MSNBC 

D.6.1 Comment PHO001-1 

Hi. I'm actually a journalist, but I thought this would be a good opportunity to mention some of 

the issues that I would like to see answered in the Final Environmental Assessment. For 

example, the shipping method that might be used to bring rockets or supplies to Texas from 

Seattle. 

FAA Response to Comment PHO001-1: In Section 2.1.4.1 of the EA, the shipping methods 

are discussed: “The New Shepard RLV components manufactured elsewhere would be 

transported to the VPF by commercial trucks.” Section 2.1.4.2 of the EA states: “Blue 

Origin would ship the New Shepard propulsion module and CC RLVs to the West Texas 

Launch Site separately. The RLVs would originate at Blue Origin’s manufacturing and 

assembly facilities in the state of Washington and would travel via ground to West Texas. 

Blue Origin plans no more than ten total RLV shipments during the five-year period from 

2006-2010. The RLVs may be fully assembled or partially disassembled during 

transportation. Some of these loads may be classified as oversized, but would be within the 

scope of loads routinely transported long distances for aerospace applications, such as 

aircraft fuselages and launch vehicle stages.” 

D.6.2 Comment PHO001-2 

The status of construction, I think that that's an important factor. It looks like construction is 

already underway, and the time frame for construction might have an effect on assessment of the 

environmental impact. If the construction period lasts for a short time, I should think that the 

impact would be less than if it lasted for a long time. 

FAA Response to Comment PHO001-2: Section 2.1.3 of the EA describes the 

construction activities and when they would occur. Specifically, the section breaks down 

the construction that would occur during three different phases: 2006; 2007-2009; and 

2010. The section states “the majority of facility construction at the site would occur 

during this period,” that is during 2006. 

D.6.3 Comment PHO001-3 

I was curious about updated information on the testing schedule. Perhaps Blue Origin would 

have a better idea of what their testing schedule is going to be, how many flights will be in what 

period of time. 

FAA Response to Comment PHO001-3: Section 2.1.3 of the EA describes Blue Origin’s 

test schedule in detail for years 2006-2010. This section explains that during 2006, no more 

than 10 flights would occur; from 2007 to 2009, no more than 25 launches would occur; 

during 2010, no more than 52 launches per year would occur. This information is still valid. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-11 

D.6.4 Comment PHO001-4 

The socioeconomic impact, there were two factors that I thought would be good to address. One 

is ancillary building projects. For example, if there are plans for other facilities that might be 

built by people who are affiliated or strike deals with Blue Origin, I imagine, for example, hotels 

or something like that, it might be good to address that. 

FAA Response to Comment PHO001-4: The EA discusses all reasonably foreseeable 

construction activities and considers the socioeconomic impacts thereof, per the 

requirements of NEPA. No hotels or ancillary building projects are anticipated at this 

time. If in the future additional construction is proposed for the launch facilities, a 

license amendment may be necessary, because launch site operator licenses are valid for 

five years. This would include consideration of socioeconomic impacts as part of the 

environmental determination. 

D.6.4 Comment PHO001-5 

And also any idea on the financials involved with the service. I would think that if the rate for 

purchasing a flight is high, that would have a greater socioeconomic impact than if the rate were 

relatively lower. So I just had those sorts of miscellaneous questions that I thought could be 

addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement with little effort. Thanks. 

FAA Response to Comment PHO001-5: All reasonably foreseeable socioeconomic 

impacts were analyzed in Section 4.9 of the EA per the requirements of NEPA. The price 

of service has not yet been determined, nor is it required for the environmental analysis. 

D.7 Mr. Ron Helm, Private Citizen 

D.7.1 Comment Document PHO002 

My name is Ron Helm, my wife and I, Janet -- my wife have ranched out here for about 30 years 

now. We consider Van Horn and Culberson County our home area. We are very excited about 

Blue Origin coming. We feel like this is a chance for Van Horn and our community and 

Culberson County to have a legitimate endeavor, private endeavor established in our community, 

and we're very excited about it, and my wife and I had ranching operations across the fence from 

where this launching site is going to be for seven years, and also had a water well service that 

serviced the water wells that are on this ranch and on this property for a number of years. I'd just 

like to say, as far as we can tell, this is a great opportunity for that particular country to be on the 

cutting edge of high technology, and it's something good for Van Horn and Culberson County. 

Thank you. 

FAA Response to Comment Document PHO002: Thank you for your comment. 
Blue Origin West Texas Commercial Launch Site 

Environmental Assessment 

D-12 

D.8 Mr. Pete S. Torres, Jr., Private Citizen 

D.8.1 Comment Document PHO003 

I'm kind of a native and kind of a stranger because I was born and raised in this town, but I went 

away for several years. In coming back here, I'm nothing but a private citizen, yet I am 

concerned more about the economy and the growth of this community, and anything that will 

help this community to grow and help the economy, I am very much for, and that was my 

comment, and this is why I'm here, because I am trying to take part in everything that's 

happening in the community and the area because I would love to see this little town that I have 

always liked and loved to grow and become a beautiful place. I thank you. 

FAA Response to Comment Document PHO003: Thank you for your comment. 

D.9 Mr. Robert Winmill, Space Institute 

D.9.1 Comment Document PHO004 

Bob Winmill, W-I-N-M-I-L-L. My questions concern the transport and reprocessing of hydrogen 

peroxide within Texas, especially high-grade, 90 percent peroxide, and if there's any 

environmental impacts with that, especially within the transport. Is it going to be on-site or is it 

going to be brought in from overseas or is it going to be made stateside? And that's the only 

comment that I had. 

FAA Response to Comment Document PHO004: The EA discusses the transportation and 

manufacturing of hydrogen peroxide. Specifically, Exhibit 4-8 notes that hydrogen peroxide 

will be “Delivered to the launch site in DOT approved trucks and containers.” Section 

4.4.1.2 notes that “Propellants used for the New Shepard RLV include rocket propulsion 

grade kerosene (RP-1) and 90 percent concentration hydrogen peroxide. These propellants 

would be delivered to the proposed site in licensed, DOT approved tank trucks, on an as 

needed basis. The RP-1 fuel would be delivered in 26,498 liter (7,000 gallon) tank trucks, 

and the hydrogen peroxide would be delivered at 90 percent concentration in 15,142 liter 

(4,000 gallon) tank trucks. No manufacturing or concentration of hydrogen peroxide would 

occur at the launch site.”