The test launch of SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket triggered a lawsuit against the Federal Aviation Administration by a coalition of environmental groups and a Native American tribe, which says the agency was too quick to approve a southern Texas launch site near a sensitive wildlife area.
(Bloomberg) — The test launch of SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket triggered a lawsuit against the Federal Aviation Administration by a coalition of environmental groups and a Native American tribe, which says the agency was too quick to approve a southern Texas launch site near a sensitive wildlife area.
The FAA, which regulates the launches of commercial rockets, should pull SpaceX’s license and not issue a new one until the agency conducts a thorough environmental review, according to the complaint, filed Monday in federal court in Washington, DC.
Read More: SpaceX Says It Blew Up Starship Rocket After Engine Mishap
The April 20 launch scattered a cloud of pulverized concrete more than six miles from the Boca Chica launch pad site, along with chunks of steel and other debris across SpaceX’s property and an adjacent state park bordering the Rio Grande Valley and the Gulf of Mexico. It also sparked a 3.5-acre fire nearby that was subsequently extinguished.
Read the lawsuit here
“As the nation carries out the modern era of spaceflight, we must decide whether we will protect the wildlife and frontline communities that can be adversely affected by our desire to reach the stars, or whether we will leave a legacy of needless destruction in the scorching wake of rocket plumes,” according to the suit.
SpaceX, formally known as Space Exploration Technologies Corp., didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the suit. The FAA said it doesn’t comment on ongoing litigation matters.
Starship’s test flight, which ended explosively four minutes after takeoff when the vehicle deviated off course, is already under investigation by the FAA, which routinely probes major mishaps in rocket launches. The agency has made compliance with environmental mitigations a condition of the launch license, it said last week.
The rocket’s launch blew a massive hole in the closely held company’s concrete launch pad. SpaceX will need to repair its launch infrastructure and get permission from the FAA before it can fly Starship again. Elon Musk’s SpaceX has big plans to send humans to the moon and eventually Mars aboard Starship, a massive reusubale rocket assembled at the Starbase launch facility.
Read More: Starship Explosion Shows Just How Far SpaceX Is From the Moon
Musk this past weekend described the launch debris as a “rock tornado” at the base of the rocket, but said during a Twitter audio discussion that “there has not been any meaningful damage to the environment that we’re aware of.”
If one were to “look at an aerial picture of the area, and apart from the area around the launch stand, tell me where things are damaged — it’s actually, you can’t even see it at this point,” he said. He added that the debris was “basically sand and rock, so it’s not like toxic at all or anything.”
FAA Erred
The coalition alleges in the suit that the FAA erred last year by failing to conduct a full environmental impact statement for the Starship program and Starbase. The launch site is adjacent to tidal flats, marshes and wetlands that provide critical habitats for migratory birds and several species, from sea turtles to plovers, ocelots and falcons.
In June 2022, the FAA determined that the Starbase facility didn’t pose a significant impact to the environment, but the agency ordered SpaceX to make 75 changes to the site and its launch plans to lessen its effects on the area.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service has said that a “plume cloud of pulverized concrete” from the Starship explosion deposited material as far as 6.5 miles (10.5 kilometers) northwest of the pad site, but the agency found no evidence of dead wildlife.
Read More: SpaceX’s Starship Launch Sparked Fire on State Park Land
Five groups joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs: the Center for Biological Diversity, the American Bird Conservancy, the Surfrider Foundation, Save RGV and the Carrizo/Comecrudo Nation of Texas Inc. The organizations say the FAA violated the National Environmental Policy Act.
The case is Center for Biological Diversity v. Federal Aviation Administration, 23-cv-01204, US District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).
–With assistance from Madlin Mekelburg, Alan Levin and Peter Jeffrey.
(Updates with recent Musk comments in eighth and ninth paragraphs)
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
©2023 Bloomberg L.P.