Texas Border Business
SpaceX was founded in 2002 to expand access to outer space. Not just for government or traditional satellite operators, but for new participants around the globe. Today, we’re flying at an unprecedented pace as the world’s most active launch services provider. SpaceX is safely and reliably launching astronauts, satellites, and other payloads on missions benefiting life on Earth and preparing humanity for our ultimate goal: to explore other planets in our solar system and beyond.
Starship is paramount to making that sci-fi future, along with a growing number of U.S. national priorities, a reality. It is the largest and most powerful space transportation system ever developed, and its fully and rapidly reusable design will exponentially increase humanity’s ability to access and utilize outer space. Full reusability has been an elusive goal throughout the history of spaceflight, piling innumerable technical challenges on what is already the most difficult engineering pursuit in human existence. It is rocket science, on ludicrous mode.
Every flight of Starship has made tremendous progress and accomplished increasingly difficult test objectives, making the entire system more capable and more reliable. Our approach of putting flight hardware in the flight environment as often as possible maximizes the pace at which we can learn recursively and operationalize the system. This is the same approach that unlocked reuse on our Falcon fleet of rockets and made SpaceX the leading launch provider in the world today.
To do this and do it rapidly enough to meet commitments to national priorities like NASA’s Artemis program, Starships need to fly. The more we fly safely, the faster we learn; the faster we learn, the sooner we realize full and rapid rocket reuse. Unfortunately, we continue to be stuck in a reality where it takes longer to do the government paperwork to license a rocket launch than it does to design and build the actual hardware. This should never happen and directly threatens America’s position as the leader in space.
FLIGHT 5
The Starship and Super Heavy vehicles for Flight 5 have been ready to launch since the first week of August. The flight test will include our most ambitious objective yet: attempt to return the Super Heavy booster to the launch site and catch it in mid-air.
This will be a singularly novel operation in the history of rocketry. SpaceX engineers have spent years preparing and months testing for the booster catch attempt, with technicians pouring tens of thousands of hours into building the infrastructure to maximize our chances for success. Every test comes with risk, especially those seeking to do something for the first time. SpaceX goes to the maximum extent possible on every flight to ensure that while we are accepting risk to our own hardware, we accept no compromises when it comes to ensuring public safety.
It’s understandable that such a unique operation would require additional time to analyze from a licensing perspective. Unfortunately, instead of focusing resources on critical safety analysis and collaborating on rational safeguards to protect both the public and the environment, the licensing process has been repeatedly derailed by issues ranging from the frivolous to the patently absurd. At times, these roadblocks have been driven by false and misleading reporting, built on bad-faith hysterics from online detractors or special interest groups who have presented poorly constructed science as fact.
We recently received a launch license date estimate of late November from the FAA, the government agency responsible for licensing Starship flight tests. This is a more than two-month delay to the previously communicated date of mid-September. This delay was not based on a new safety concern, but instead driven by superfluous environmental analysis. The four open environmental issues are illustrative of the difficulties launch companies face in the current regulatory environment for launch and reentry licensing.
Starship’s water-cooled steel flame deflector has been the target of false reporting, wrongly alleging that it pollutes the environment or has operated completely independent of regulation. This narrative omits fundamental facts that have either been ignored or intentionally misinterpreted.
At no time did SpaceX operate the deflector without a permit. SpaceX was operating in good faith under a Multi-Sector General Permit to cover deluge operations under the supervision of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). SpaceX worked closely with TCEQ to incorporate numerous mitigation measures prior to its use, including the installation of retention basins, construction of protective curbing, plugging of outfalls during operations, and use of only potable (drinking) water that does not come into contact with any industrial processes. A permit number was assigned and made active in July 2023. TCEQ officials were physically present at the first testing of the deluge system and given the opportunity to observe operations around launch.
The water-cooled steel flame deflector does not spray pollutants into the surrounding environment. Again, it uses literal drinking water. Outflow water has been sampled after every use of the system and consistently shows negligible traces of any contaminants, and specifically, that all levels have remained below standards for all state permits that would authorize discharge. TCEQ, the FAA, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service evaluated the use of the system prior to its initial use, and during tests and launch, and determined it would not cause environmental harm.
When the EPA issued its Administrative Order in March 2024, it was done before seeking a basic understanding of the facts of the water-cooled steel flame deflector’s operation or acknowledgement that we were operating under the Texas Multi-Sector General Permit. After meeting with the EPA—during which the EPA stated their intent was not to stop testing, preparation, or launch operations—it was decided that SpaceX should apply for an individual discharge permit. Despite our previous permitting, which was done in coordination with TCEQ, and our operation having little to nothing in common with industrial waste discharges covered by individual permits, we applied for an individual permit in July 2024.
The subsequent fines levied on SpaceX by TCEQ and the EPA are entirely tied to disagreements over paperwork. We chose to settle so that we can focus our energy on completing the missions and commitments that we have made to the U.S. government, commercial customers, and ourselves. Paying fines is extremely disappointing when we fundamentally disagree with the allegations, and we are supported by the fact that EPA has agreed that nothing about the operation of our flame deflector will need to change. Only the name of the permit has changed.
GOOD STEWARD
No launch site operates in a vacuum. As we have built up capacity to launch and developed new sites across the country, we have always been committed to public safety and mitigating impacts to the environment. At Starbase, we implement an extensive list of mitigations developed with federal and state agencies, many of which require year-round monitoring and frequent updates to regulators and consultation with independent biological experts. The list of measures we take just for operations in Texas is over two hundred items long, including constant monitoring and sampling of the short and long-term health of local flora and fauna. The narrative that we operate free of, or in defiance of, environmental regulation is demonstrably false.
On Starship’s fourth flight, the top of the Super Heavy booster, commonly known as the hot-stage, was jettisoned to splash down on its own in the Gulf of Mexico. The hot-stage plays an important part in protecting the booster during separation from Starship’s upper stage before detaching during the booster’s return flight. This operation was analyzed thoroughly ahead of Starship’s fourth flight, specifically focused on any potential impact to protected marine species. Given the distribution of marine animals in the specific landing area and comparatively small size of the hot-stage, the probability of a direct impact is essentially zero. This is something previously determined as standard practice by the FAA and the National Marine Fisheries Service for the launch industry at large, which disposes of rocket stages and other hardware in the ocean on every single launch, except of course, for our own Falcon rockets which land and are reused. The only proposed modification for Starship’s fifth flight is a marginal change in the splashdown location of the hot-stage which produces no increase in likelihood for impacting marine life. Despite this, the FAA leadership approved a 60-day consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service. Furthermore, the mechanics of these types of consultations outline that any new questions raised during that time can reset the 60-day counter, over and over again. This single issue, which was already exhaustively analyzed, could indefinitely delay launch without addressing any plausible impact to the environment.
Another unique aspect to Starship’s fifth flight and a future return and catch of the Super Heavy booster will be the audible sonic booms in the area around the return location. As we’ve previously noted, the general impact to those in the surrounding area of a sonic boom is the brief thunder-like noise. The FAA, in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, evaluated sonic booms from the landing of the Super Heavy and found no significant impacts to the environment. Although animals exposed to the sonic booms may be briefly startled, numerous prior studies have shown sonic booms of varying intensity have no detrimental effect on wildlife. Despite this documented evidence, the FAA leadership approved an additional 60-day consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife as a slightly larger area could experience a sonic boom.
Lastly, the area around Starbase is well known as being host to various protected birds. SpaceX already has extensive mitigations in place and has been conducting biological monitoring for birds near Starbase for nearly 10 years. The protocol for the monitoring was developed with U.S. Fish and Wildlife service, and is conducted by professional, qualified, independent biologists. To date, the monitoring has not shown any population-level impacts to monitored bird populations, despite unsubstantiated claims to the contrary that the authors themselves later amended. Even though Starship’s fifth flight will take place outside of nesting season, SpaceX is still implementing additional mitigations and monitoring to minimize impacts to wildlife, including infrared drone surveillance pre- and post-launch to track nesting presence. We are also working with USFWS experts to assess deploying special protection measures prior to launches during bird nesting season.
TO FLY
Despite a small, but vocal, minority of detractors trying to game the regulatory system to obstruct and delay the development of Starship, SpaceX remains committed to the mission at hand. Our thousands of employees work tirelessly because they believe that unlimited opportunities and tangible benefits for life on Earth are within reach if humanity can fundamentally advance its ability to access space. This is why we’re committed to continually pushing the boundaries of spaceflight, with a relentless focus on safety and reliability.
Because life will be multiplanetary, and will be made possible by the farsighted strides we take today.
Information Source: SpaceX Media Relations
