FAA administrator defends SpaceX licensing actions on safety grounds

WASHINGTON — The head of the Federal Aviation Administration said safety was the reason why it recently fined SpaceX and delayed an updated Starship launch license, comments that drew a sharp rebuke from SpaceX.

The remarks by FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker at a Sept. 24 hearing of the aviation subcommittee of the House Transportation Committee and the rebuttal by SpaceX represent the latest chapter in an increasingly strident dispute between the agency and the company on regulation of commercial launches.

During the hearing, primarily devoted to oversight of Boeing’s commercial airliner business, Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) asked Whitaker if the FAA was applying “undue scrutiny” on SpaceX’s operations. He cited a $633,000 fine the FAA proposed Sept. 17 for violating license terms on two Falcon launches in 2023 and delays in updating the license for the next Starship test flight.

“I was hoping you could speak to that issue and, in particular, whether you think the delay of the Starship launch is in the public interest,” Kiley asked.

“I think safety is in the public interest and that’s our primary focus,” Whitaker responded, defending the fines for the Falcon launches as well. “It’s the only tool we have to get compliance on safety matters.”

Whitaker claimed that SpaceX “launched without a permit.” The company had licenses for both the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches that the agency has fined. The FAA stated when it announced the fines that SpaceX had not complied with terms of the licenses that the company had sought to change, such as use of a new control center and a new propellant tank farm, but that the FAA had not approved at the time of those launches.

The Starship licensing delay, he said, “had to do with SpaceX filing an application and not disclosing they were in violation of Texas and federal law on some matters, and that’s a requirement to get a permit.”

Kiley pressed Whitaker on whether the delays were due to safety issues. Whitaker said that there are delays for analysis of sonic booms from the returning Super Heavy booster, which SpaceX will attempt to land back at the launch site for the first time on the upcoming flight. “I think the sonic boom analysis is a safety-related incident,” said Whitaker.

He also defended the delay in completing an updated Starship license, pushing the launch back from September to late November. “I think the two-month delay is necessary to comply with the launch requirements and I think that’s an important part of the safety culture.”

Kiley expressed concerns that the FAA “does not seem like it is operating in a way that is conducive with continued innovation” by the launch industry. “Do you agree that the FAA needs to be reformed in a way that is better suited towards the type of innovation that we should be moving towards in the commercial space industry?”

“SpaceX has been a very innovative company,” Whitaker responded, “but I think they’re also a mature company. They’ve been around 20 years. I think they need to operate at the highest level of safety, and that includes adopting an SMS [safety management system] program and that includes having a whistleblower program.”

Asked if there was any path to move up the next Starship launch, he responded, “complying with the regulations would be the best path.”

Later in the day, SpaceX released a letter it sent to Kiley responding to Whitaker’s comments at the hearing. “In responding to your questions, Administrator Whitaker made several incorrect statements today regarding SpaceX,” the company stated, “In fact, every statement he made was incorrect.”

In addition to correcting the status of the licenses for the Falcon launches, SpaceX noted in its response that the Falcon Heavy fuel farm was not moved closer to populated areas, as Whitaker stated, but instead to a greater distance. SpaceX also said that the sonic boom analysis is not a safety issue but instead a “paperwork exercise” from an environmental consultation.

SpaceX added that it was not in violation of laws for use of its deluge system, noting that it had a permit from Texas regulators for it. However, SpaceX is facing a $148,378 fine from the Environmental Protection Agency in part for wastewater discharges from that deluge system without an EPA permit.

“It is deeply concerning that the Administrator does not appear to have accurate information immediately available to him with respect to SpaceX licensing matters,” SpaceX stated in its letter.

Related