Duval Times

The Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) frequent delays in approving launch and reentry licenses are slowing the innovation and development of space missions. The FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation must ensure its regulatory framework keeps pace with the rapidly evolving commercial space industry. This is crucial to ensure that regulatory restrictions do not inhibit the United States’ leadership in the face of global competition from China and Russia.

U.S. Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Rick Scott (R-FL) sent a letter to FAA Administrator Michael Whitaker requesting clarity on the current approach to issuing launch and reentry licenses.

“As near-peer competitors continue to make significant strides in their space capabilities, in both developing new vehicles and vast new infrastructure, it is more crucial than ever that our regulatory processes enable commercial and government stakeholders to ensure the United States continues to lead the way.”

Flashback… Senators Rubio and Scott wrote to U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg in November 2023 on the continued delays in the FAA issuing launch licenses.

The full text of the letter is below.

Dear Administrator Whitaker:

We write with regard to the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) Office of Commercial Space Transportation’s (AST) current approach for licensing launches or reentries under Part 450. As you are aware, the space industry, which supports critical national security missions, is rapidly evolving, and it is crucial that our regulatory framework keeps pace with these developments to ensure the continued growth and competitiveness of the United States in the global space sector. Failure to do so risks putting our country’s space ambitions behind our competitors– namely China and Russia.

We are seeking to understand how AST is utilizing its current resources and authorities under Title 51 to ensure that the U.S. remains a leader in commercial space activities, including the FAA’s direction to bolster commercial space companies by “simplifying and expediting the issuance and transfer for commercial of commercial licenses.” Part 450 was specifically designed to facilitate a streamlined process for industry, including the ability to issue a license for multiple launches and allow for greater flexibility and efficiency in commercial space operations. However, industry stakeholders have reported significant challenges in Part 450 implementation and obtaining these licenses due to overly specific, cumbersome, and often restrictive requirements imposed by AST.

In addition, while Part 450 was released in 2020, AST has not released most of its internal and external regulatory guidance detailing how to comply with this rule, leading to confusion during the licensing process. In its Fiscal Year 2025 budget request, FAA acknowledged these issues, stating: “AST licensing remains a ‘gate’ to space for other national priorities” and that there are “some shortcomings in part 450 rule as well as gaps in standards and guidance.”

We are also concerned about delays introduced by AST’s current interpretation of its licensing authority. By law, AST is authorized to regulate launch activity "to protect public health and safety, safety of property, national security interests." Industry has reported that AST's processes for reviewing licenses are fragmented misaligned with statutory responsibilities causing major delays for key national priorities like Artemis Program timelines must keep pace with commercial activity we cannot allow management issues give China edge race back Moon

Given importance simplifying accelerating particularly context maintaining ensuring resilience infrastructure efficient aligned statutory goals reducing burdens industry near-peer competitors making significant strides capabilities developing vehicles vast infrastructure more crucial than ever regulatory processes enable stakeholders lead way significance future operations critical work together framework supports success light concerns request answers following questions:

What specific challenges has AST encountered issuing multiple launches or reentries under Part 450 steps undertaking expand use authority?

Has AST considered adjustments procedures better align statutory goals expedite process especially missions importance?

What steps taking focused core mission protecting public safety devoting vital resources time areas like mission assurance authorization fall outside statutory authority?

Other than requesting additional financial resources what steps addressing concerns time takes process applications plan improve efficiency?

How does issue formal feedback when occur applications?

While public safety critical importance anticipate prioritizing flexibility required multiple growing demand rapid repeatable operations?

We appreciate your attention important issue look forward response.

Sincerely,