SpaceX has formally responded to recent statements made by Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Administrator Mike Whitaker during a Congressional hearing.
In a letter to U.S. Representative Kevin Kiley written on Tuesday, SpaceX disputed several claims made by Whitaker regarding the company’s compliance with licensing and safety procedures for its Falcon and Starship launches.
The letter, dated September 24, 2024, addressed what SpaceX called “incorrect statements” made by Whitaker concerning the company’s permits, environmental impacts, and safety measures. According to SpaceX, “every statement made was incorrect” in reference to the allegations.
Licensing Disputes
One of the key claims from Administrator Whitaker was that SpaceX had launched a mission without proper licensing. SpaceX’s Senior Director of Global Government Affairs, Mat Dunn, countered this, stating: “SpaceX was fully licensed to launch the Falcon missions,” adding that the FAA had not alleged the company violated any launch permit regulations under the Commercial Space Launch Act.
Dunn emphasized that the company’s launches, including those for Falcon and Starship, had all been conducted under proper FAA oversight and approval.
Environmental Safety and Sonic Booms
Whitaker also alleged that SpaceX had failed to provide updated sonic boom analyses, suggesting that the FAA had to enter a two-month consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) due to environmental concerns. SpaceX countered, claiming that the FWS had already reviewed the sonic boom impacts of Starship launches and determined they did not present an environmental risk.
Dunn pointed out that while SpaceX provided FAA data showing a slightly larger sonic boom area than initially reported, “there is no new environmental impact.” SpaceX acknowledged the consultation with FWS but described it as a “paperwork exercise” rather than a significant safety issue.
Fuel Farm and Risk Analysis
Another point of contention was Whitaker’s assertion that SpaceX moved a fuel farm closer to the population without performing a risk analysis. Dunn clarified that SpaceX relocated the fuel farm to a site “more than twice the distance from the nearest publicly accessible area” and had provided all necessary analysis to the FAA, which approved the new location.
Additionally, SpaceX highlighted that the FAA’s range safety authorities were present during the launch, confirming that the fuel farm move did not disrupt safety protocols.
Permit for Deluge Operations
Whitaker’s final allegation involved the lack of a permit for SpaceX’s deluge system, which he claimed delayed FAA licensing. SpaceX denied this, stating that the deluge system operated under a permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and had been evaluated by both the FAA and the FWS, which found no environmental risks.
“At no time did SpaceX operate its deluge system without a permit,” Dunn affirmed. He further noted that the FAA, TCEQ, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had all confirmed that SpaceX’s deluge operations could continue under the current permit.
SpaceX’s letter expressed concern that Administrator Whitaker appeared to lack accurate information regarding the company’s compliance with FAA licensing matters. Dunn reiterated SpaceX’s commitment to safety and environmental responsibility, stating: “SpaceX is the safest, most reliable launch provider in the world.”
Whitaker and the FAA need to wake up, as their oversized bureaucracy is slowing down SpaceX and its pace of innovation.
