Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 210 / Tuesday, November 1, 2005 / Notices 65961 

use of fertilizers will also be avoided or 

minimized in this area. 

• In order to reduce the impacts to 

wetlands, TVA will provide 

compensatory mitigation for 3.8 acres of 

high quality forested wetlands at a 1:1 

ratio. Compensatory mitigation 

measures include, but are not limited to, 

the purchase of credits in an existing 

mitigation bank within the hydrologic 

unit for the project area or an adjacent 

hydrologic unit, and restoration of 

forested wetlands in or adjacent to the 

project area hydrologic unit by TVA or 

through an in-lieu-fee agreement with a 

state agency or private conservation 

organization. A higher mitigation ratio 

will be used if required by the Section 

404 permit issued by the Corps of 

Engineers. 

• No invasive plant species will be 

planted on the new ROW. 

Dated: October 20, 2005 

W. David Hall, 

Vice President, Electric System Projects. 

[FR Doc. 05–21696 Filed 10–31–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8120–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Environmental Finding 

Document: Finding of No Significant 

Impact; Notice. 

SUMMARY: On May 23, 2005, the FAA 

Office of Commercial Space 

Transportation (AST) received an 

application for a launch license from 

Space Exploration Technologies, Inc. 

(SpaceX) to conduct launches of its 

Falcon 1 launch vehicle from Omelek 

Island, U.S. Army Kwajalein Atoll/ 

Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Test 

Site (USAKA/RTS). The FAA 

participated as a cooperating agency 

with the U.S. Army Space and Missile 

Defense Command (USASMDC) in 

preparation of the Environmental 

Assessment (EA) for the Proof-ofPrinciple Space Launches from Omelek 

Island (February 2005). The EA 

analyzed the environmental 

consequences of conducting two proofof-principle launches of the Falcon 1 

Launch Vehicle from Omelek Island, 

USAKA/RTS. From its independent 

review and consideration, the FAA has 

determined that the FAA’s proposed 

action is substantially the same as the 

actions already analyzed in the 

USASMDC EA and that FAA’s 

comments and suggestions have been 

satisfied (see 1506.3(c) and FAA Order 

1050.1E, 518h). The FAA formally 

adopts the EA and hereby incorporates 

the analysis to support its decision on 

this license application. 

After reviewing and analyzing 

currently available data and information 

on existing conditions, project impacts, 

and measures to mitigate those impacts, 

the FAA has determined that licensing 

the proposed launch activities is not a 

Federal action that would significantly 

affect the quality of the human 

environment within the meaning of the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA). Therefore, the preparation of an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

is not required and the FAA is issuing 

a Finding of No Significant Impact 

(FONSI). The FAA made this 

determination in accordance with all 

applicable environmental laws. 

FOR A COPY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL

ASSESSMENT OR THE FONSI CONTACT: A 

copy of the EA is available at: http:// 

www.smdcen.us/pubdocs/files/spacex_ 

final_ea_ signed_fnsi_ 13dec04.pdf. 

Questions or comments should be 

directed to Ms. Stacey Zee; FAA 

Environmental Specialist; Federal 

Aviation Administration; 800 

Independence Ave., SW.; AST–100, 

Suite 331; Washington, DC 20591; (202) 

267–9305. 

Background 

Launches of launch vehicles, such as 

SpaceX’s proposed launches of the 

Falcon 1 launch vehicle from Omelek 

Island, must be licensed by the FAA 

pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Sections 70101–

70121, the Commercial Space Launch 

Act. Licensing the launch of a launch 

vehicle is a Federal action requiring 

environmental analysis by the FAA in 

accordance with NEPA, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 

4321 et seq. Upon receipt of a complete 

license application, the FAA must 

decide whether to issue a launch license 

to SpaceX for launching the Falcon 1 

launch vehicle from Omelek Island, 

USAKA/RTS. An environmental 

determination is required for the 

evaluation of a license application. The 

FAA is using the analyses in the 

USASMDC EA as the basis for the 

environmental determination of the 

impacts to support licensing the Falcon 

launch vehicle from Omelek Island. 

Proposed Action 

SpaceX is proposing to launch the 

Falcon 1 launch vehicle from Omelek 

Island, USAKA/RTS. The Falcon is a 

small, unmanned, two-stage launch 

vehicle designed to put small payloads 

into orbit. It uses liquid oxygen (LOX) 

and kerosene as propellants. The first 

stage, which is reusable, uses a 

parachute and would be recovered. The 

second stage is not reusable and is not 

intended to be recovered. 

The issuance of a FONSI does not 

guarantee that a license will be issued 

by the FAA for the launch of the Falcon 

1 launch vehicle. However, if a license 

is issued, SpaceX would be authorized 

to launch the Falcon 1 launch vehicle 

carrying a Razaksat Satellite built by 

ATSB. The Razaksat Satellite (formerly 

known as MACSAT) is an Earth 

observation spacecraft containing a 

medium aperture camera. It would be 

launched on a 90-degree azimuth to an 

orbit of 685 kilometers (426 miles). 

The USASMDC EA considered four 

alternative site locations for the 

facilities to be constructed at Omelek 

Island. These alternatives are no longer 

under consideration because a final 

launch site has been selected. Under the 

No Action Alternative, the Falcon 1 

launch vehicle would not be launched 

from Omelek Island. 

Environmental Impacts 

The following presents a brief 

summary of the environmental impacts 

considered in the USASMDC EA. The 

USASMDC EA is incorporated by 

reference in this FONSI and the FAA’s 

FONSI is based upon the impacts 

discussed in that EA. Land Use, 

socioeconomics, environmental justice, 

and aesthetics were not discussed in the 

USASMDC EA. Based on the original 

analysis, it was determined that there 

would be no significant impacts to land 

use or aesthetics because Omelek Island 

would remain under U.S. Army 

management and would continue to be 

used for missile research. There would 

be no impacts to socioeconomics or 

environmental justice, because except 

for base personnel, the island is 

uninhabited. The project would only 

require a few existing base personnel 

and 20 SpaceX personnel and would not 

cause any impact to off base or lowincome populations. 

Air Quality: Falcon launches would 

have only a localized, minimal impact 

on air quality. Long-term effects are not 

expected because the launches would be 

infrequent and the resulting emissions 

would be rapidly dispersed and diluted 

by trade winds. Regional air quality and 

ambient air quality standards would not 

be impacted by launches of the Falcon 

1 vehicle. 

Airspace: USAKA/RTS is located 

under international airspace and 

therefore, has no formal airspace 

restrictions governing it. However, the 

Omelek launch site is approximately 35 

kilometers (22 miles) north of Bucholz 

Army Airfield and Falcon launches 

65962 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 210 / Tuesday, November 1, 2005 / Notices 

could potentially impact flight patterns 

for military aircraft in the area. SpaceX 

would coordinate Falcon 1 launches 

with the USAKA/RTS Commander, 

which would include scheduling 

launches to avoid airspace conflicts. 

Biological Resources: Disturbances to 

vegetation and wildlife during Falcon 

launches would be minimal and brief. 

Based on existing analyses of prior and 

current launches within the region, 

launch disturbances on migratory birds, 

threatened or endangered species and 

other wildlife would be minimal. There 

is a very small possibility that debris or 

booster drops could impact migratory 

whales or sea turtles; however, the 

majority of the potential impact area is 

open-ocean, where the probability of 

impacting a species would be very low. 

Potential habitat for sea turtles on 

Omelek includes sandy beaches along 

the southern and northern tips of the 

island and the area of the lagoon 

shoreline from the northern tip of the 

island south to the north jetty. 

Personnel would be instructed to avoid 

all contact with sea turtles or turtle 

nests that might occur within the area. 

On the day of the launch or the day 

before, SpaceX or USAKA/RTS 

personnel would fence the beach 100 

meters (328 feet) on either side of the 

launch site just above the wave surge 

area at a sufficient height to prevent sea 

turtles from hauling out at this area and 

thus would prevent a take during a 

nominal launch. No site preparation 

activities would take place offshore, and 

thus marine mammals would not be 

affected. 

No impacts are expected to vegetation 

since sufficient open space should exist 

around the launch site to absorb ground 

effects without directly impacting 

surrounding vegetation. 

Cultural Resources: Personnel 

involved in launch and other 

operational activities would follow 

USAKA Environmental Standards (UES) 

requirements in handling or avoiding 

any cultural resources uncovered during 

operational or monitoring activities. 

This would include ongoing 

consultation with the Republic of the 

Marshall Islands Historic Preservation 

Officer on any cultural resource issues 

encountered during operations. In 

addition, no historic World War II or 

significant Cold War features have been 

identified on Omelek. Therefore, no 

significant impacts to cultural resources 

are anticipated. 

Geology and Soils: Falcon 1 launch 

vehicle emissions would consist mainly 

of carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, 

hydrogen and water and would not 

result in any impacts to geology or soils. 

There would be a slight risk of soil 

contamination from accidental spills of 

propellants or premature flight 

termination; however, this risk would 

be minimized because emergency 

response personnel would comply with 

the Hazardous Waste Management Plan 

and Hazardous Materials Contingency 

Plan prepared by SpaceX and the 

Kwajalein Environmental Emergency 

Plan. 

Hazardous Materials and Waste: 

Materials proposed for use as a result of 

the Proposed Action are similar to 

hazardous materials already in use for 

other operations at USAKA/RTS. New 

hazardous materials would represent 

only a small increase in the total 

amount of materials handled and could 

easily be accommodated by existing 

hazardous materials management 

systems. Hazardous waste management 

at USAKA/RTS would continue to be 

performed in accordance with the UES, 

which requires shipment of hazardous 

waste back to the Continental United 

States for treatment and/or disposal; 

therefore, there would not be a 

significant impact. 

Health and Safety: Launches of the 

Falcon 1 vehicle from Omelek Island 

would comply with all UES and 

USAKA/RTS Range Safety 

Requirements. This includes performing 

flight safety studies, coordinating 

launches with the Range Safety Officer 

and evacuating the uninvolved public 

from the launch hazard area prior to any 

launch. In addition, as part of their 

launch operator license application, 

SpaceX has developed a number of 

safety procedures for Falcon 1 launches. 

Marshallese individuals who have 

permission to stay temporarily on 

Omelek while fishing from adjacent 

islands would be asked by the USAKA/ 

RTS Commander to evacuate the launch 

hazard area once the Falcon 1 rocket has 

been brought to the island. The 

Marshallese could resume their 

habitation once launch activities have 

been accomplished and the associated 

facilities secured. Access to Omelek 

would be limited to all but mission 

essential persons and personnel would 

be evacuated from the island prior to 

launch. There is no expected significant 

impact to health and safety. 

Infrastructure: The USASMDC EA 

found that there would be no impacts to 

infrastructure from constructing and 

operating the Falcon 1 launch program 

on Omelek Island. However, for this 

document, the FAA is analyzing only 

the licensing of Falcon launches and no 

construction or upgrades to roads or 

utilities would be required under the 

Proposed Action. Therefore, there 

would be no impacts to infrastructure 

from Falcon 1 launch operations at 

Omelek Island. 

Noise: Falcon 1 pre-launch and 

launch operations on Omelek Island 

would result in only temporary noise 

impacts. The island has been developed 

solely as a launch support facility and 

there are no inhabited islands within 21 

kilometers (13 miles) of the site. SpaceX 

personnel would be evacuated from the 

island prior to launch and would not be 

impacted by the launch. The Falcon 1 

launch vehicle would reach supersonic 

speeds at an altitude of approximately 

eight kilometers (five miles) over the 

open ocean and the resultant sonic 

boom would not adversely impact any 

surrounding USAKA islands. Wildlife 

near the launch site would be 

temporarily impacted by noise 

generated during launch operations; 

however, the level of disturbance would 

be minimal due to the temporary and 

infrequent nature of launch operations. 

Water Resources: There is the 

potential for carbonic acid (a mild acid 

similar to that in a carbonated beverage) 

to be produced during launch from the 

reaction of carbon dioxide in the 

exhaust plume and water. This carbonic 

acid would be expected to rapidly 

evaporate and would have a similar pH 

to that of rainwater; therefore, no 

impacts to water resources would be 

expected to occur from launch 

emissions. 

There is the potential for an 

accidental propellant spill or premature 

flight termination to result in released 

propellant contaminating water 

resources. This risk, however, would be 

minimized through compliance with the 

Hazardous Materials Contingency Plan 

and Hazardous Waste Management Plan 

prepared by SpaceX and the Kwajalein 

Environmental Management Plan. 

Cumulative Impacts: The proposed 

action would not occur at the same time 

as other programs such as Ground-Based 

Midcourse Defense or Minuteman III 

planned for the region. Launches are 

short-term, discrete events, thus 

allowing time between launches for 

emission products to be dispersed and 

minimizing the potential for impacts to 

airspace users, biological resources, and 

public health and safety. No significant 

cumulative impacts are expected to air 

quality, airspace, biological resources, 

cultural resources, geology and soils, 

hazardous materials and waste, health 

and safety, infrastructure, noise, and 

water resources. 

Determination: An analysis of the 

Proposed Action has concluded that 

there are no significant short-term or 

long-term effects to the environment or 

surrounding populations. After careful 

and thorough consideration of the facts 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 210 / Tuesday, November 1, 2005 / Notices 65963 

herein, the undersigned finds that the 

proposed Federal action is consistent 

with existing national environmental 

policies and objectives set forth in 

Section 101(a) of NEPA and that it will 

not significantly affect the quality of the 

human environment or otherwise 

include any condition requiring 

consultation pursuant to Section 

102(2)(c) of NEPA. Therefore, an EIS for 

the proposed action is not required. 

Issued on October 25, 2005 in Washington, 

DC. 

Patricia Grace Smith, 

Associate Administrator for Commercial 

Space Transportation. 

[FR Doc. 05–21746 Filed 10–31–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–22842] 

Notice of Opportunity To Participate, 

Criteria Requirements and Application 

Procedure for Participation in the 

Military Airport Program (MAP) 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of criteria and 

application procedures for designation 

or redesignation, for the fiscal year 2006 

MAP. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

criteria, application procedures, and 

schedule to be applied by the Secretary 

of Transportation in designating or 

redesignating, and funding capital 

development annually for up to 15 

current (joint-use) or former military 

airports seeking designation or 

redesignation to participate in the 

Military Airport Program (MAP). 

The MAP allows the Secretary to 

designate current (joint-use) or former 

military airports to receive grants from 

the Airport Improvement Program (AIP). 

The Secretary is authorized to designate 

an airport (other than an airport 

designated before August 24, 1994) only 

if: 

(1) The airport is a former military 

installation closed or realigned under 

the Title 10 U.S.C. 2687 (announcement 

of closures of large Department of 

Defense installations after September 

30, 1977), or under section 201 or 2905 

of the Defense Authorization 

Amendments and Base Closure and 

Realignment Acts; or 

(2) the airport is a military installation 

with both military and civil aircraft 

operations. 

The Secretary shall consider for 

designation only those current or former 

military airports, at least partly 

converted to civilian airports as part of 

the national air transportation system, 

that will reduce delays at airports with 

more than 20,000 hours of annual 

delays in commercial passenger aircraft 

takeoffs and landings, or will enhance 

airport and air traffic control system 

capacity in metropolitan areas or reduce 

current and projected flight delays (49 

U.S.C. 47118(c)). 

DATES: Applications must be received 

on or before December 12, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit an original and two 

copies of Standard Form (SF) 424, 

‘‘Application for Federal Assistance,’’

prescribed by the Office of Management 

and Budget Circular A–102, available at 

http://www.faa.gov/arp/ace/forms/ 

sf424.doc, along with any supporting 

and justifying documentation. 

Applicant should specifically request to 

be considered for designation or 

redesignation to participate in the fiscal 

year 2006 MAP. Submission should be 

sent to the Regional FAA Airports 

Division or Airports District Office that 

serves the airport. Applicants may find 

the proper office on the FAA Web site 

http://www.faa.gov/arp/ 

regions.crm?nav=regions or may contact 

the office below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Ball (Kendall.Ball@faa.gov.), Airports 

financial Assistance Division (APP–

500), Office of Airport Planning and 

Programming, Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), 800 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20591, (202) 267–7436. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

General Description of the Program 

The MAP provides capital 

development assistance to civil airport 

sponsors of designated current (jointuse) military airfields or former military 

airports that are included in the FAA’s 

National Plan of Integrated Airport 

Systems (NPIAS). Airports designated to 

the MAP may obtain funds from a setaside (currently four percent) of AIP 

discretionary funds for airport 

development, including certain projects 

not otherwise eligible for AIP assistance. 

These airports may also be eligible to 

receive grants from other categories of 

AIP funding. 

Number of Airports 

A maximum of 15 airports per fiscal 

year (FY) may participate in the MAP. 

There are 6 slots available for 

designation or redesignation in FY 2006. 

There are no general aviation slots 

available. 

Term of Designation 

The maximum term is five fiscal years 

following designation. The FAA can 

designate airports for a period of less 

than five years. The FAA will evaluate 

the conversion needs of the airport in its 

capital development plan to determine 

the appropriate length of designation. 

Redesignation 

Previously designated airports may 

apply for redesignation of an additional 

term not to exceed five years. Those 

airports must meet current eligibility 

requirements in 49 U.S.C. 47118 (a) at 

the beginning of each grant period and 

have MAP eligible projects. The FAA 

will evaluate applications for 

redesignation primarily in terms of 

warranted projects fundable only under 

the MAP as these candidates tend to 

have fewer conversion needs than new 

candidates. The FAA wants MAP 

airports to graduate to regular AIR 

participation. 

Eligible Projects 

In addition to eligible AIP projects, 

MAP can fund fuel farms, utility 

systems, surface automobile parking 

lots, hangars, and air cargo terminals up 

to 50,000 square feet. Designated or 

redesignated military airports can 

receive not more than $7,000,000 for 

each fiscal year after 2005 for projects to 

construct, improve, or repair terminal 

building facilities. Designated or 

redesignated military airports can 

receive not more than $7,000,000 for 

each fiscal year after 2005 for MAP 

eligible projects that include hangars, 

cargo facilities, fuel farms, automobile 

surface parking, and utility work. 

Designation Considerations 

In making designations of new 

candidate airports, the Secretary of 

Transportation may only designate an 

airport (other than an airport so 

designed before August 24, 1994) if it 

meets the following general 

requirements: 

(1) The airport is a former military 

installation closed or realigned under: 

(A) Section 2687 of Title 10; 

(B) Section 201 of the Defense 

Authorization Amendments and Base 

Closure and Realignment Act (BRAC) 

(10 U.S.C. 2687 note); or 

(C) Section 2905 of the Defense Base 

Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 

(10 U.S.C. 2687 note); or 

(2) The airport is a military 

installation with both military and civil 

aircraft operations; and 

(3) The airport is classified as a 

commercial service or reliever airport in 

the NPIAS. (see 49 U.S.C. 47105(b)(2) 

and 47118(c)(1)) One of the designated