WASHINGTON — Members of Congress and the space industry criticized the Federal Aviation Administration for implementation of launch licensing regulations they claim threaten American competitiveness in space.
A Sept. 10 hearing by the House Science Committee’s space subcommittee on “encouraging commercial space innovation while maintaining public safety” became a forum for complaints about a set of commercial launch and reentry regulations at the FAA, known as Part 450, intended to streamline the licensing process.
Many in the launch industry have warned since the regulations went into force in March 2021 that it was difficult for companies to obtain licenses under Part 450. Industry officials raised concerns about Part 450 at an October 2023 hearing of the Senate Commerce Committee’s space subcommittee, with one witness, Bill Gerstenmaier of SpaceX, warning the “entire regulatory system is at risk of collapse” because of the difficulties getting licenses under the new regulations.
Witnesses at the House hearing made clear those concerns have not abated. “The way it is being implemented today has caused severe licensing delays, confusion and is jeopardizing our long-held leadership position,” said Dave Cavossa, president of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation, an industry group whose members include several launch companies.
He cited specific concerns such as a long “pre-application” process with the FAA where companies, he said, “get stuck in an endless back-and-forth process” with the agency to determine how they can meet the performance-based requirements of Part 450 with limited guidance. “This process is taking years,” he argued.
The FAA intends to address this through a series of documents known as advisory circulars, which outline ways license applicants can show compliance with the regulations. But Cavossa noted that the FAA has yet to publish many of the planned circulars.
Mike French, vice chair of the FAA’s Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Group (COMSTAC), agreed with those concerns, noting that the committee had offered several recommendations to FAA on ways to address problems with the Part 450 regulations. That included expanding the 180-day time period the FAA has to evaluate a completed license application to include some parts of the pre-application process as well as allowing companies to use existing legacy regulations for cases where there are no advisory circulars for the new regulations.
“We have a licensing regime with a lack of certainty, a lack of transparency and significant delays,” said Pamela Meredith, chair of the space law practice group at KMA Zuckert LLC.
Members on both sides if the aisle shared frustrations about Part 450. “License processing under the new Part 450 process is moving at a snail’s pace,” said Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas), chairman of the subcommittee.
He said he was concerned about implications it could have for NASA’s Artemis program, since the Human Landing System landers being developed by SpaceX and Blue Origin will launch using commercial licenses. “I fear at this rate the Communist Party will launch taikonauts to the moon while U.S. industry remains tethered to Earth with red tape.”
“We are in a bureaucratic soup,” said Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) later in the hearing. “We know we’re not getting to the moon unless we get some commercial spacecraft. So something’s not working here.”
The only person defending the Part 450 regulations at the hearing was Kelvin Coleman, FAA associate administrator for commercial space transportation. He said his office has developed new tools to help license applicants and continues to develop advisory circulars, as well as holds workshops and “office hours” on regulations. A budget increase in fiscal year 2024 has allowed the office to grow to 158 people, and the FAA is seeking a further increase in 2025 to hire additional staff to help with licensing.
He acknowledged, though, that industry has moved only slowly to the new regulations, with 6 of about 30 existing licenses moving to the new regulations. All existing licensees must transition to Part 450 by March 2026. “I will say that March 2026, at the moment, looks very challenging,” he said.
Coleman announced in February that the FAA would establish an aerospace rulemaking committee, or SpARC, to study ways to improve the Part 450 licensing process. At the time he said he hoped to have the committee in place by the fall.
The SpARC is not yet established, but he said the charter for it is being reviewed. “We hope to have it stood up in short order.”
SpaceX Starship licensing delays
SpaceX was not represented at the hearing, but its issues with launch licensing for its Starship vehicle came up during it. The company published an update on its website while the hearing was in progress complaining of delays securing a license for its next Starship flight.
“The Starship and Super Heavy vehicles for Flight 5 have been ready to launch since the first week of August,” the company stated. “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.”
SpaceX said the delay was caused by a “superfluous environmental analysis” linked to issues like its water deluge system at its pad and a change in the splashdown location for the interstage or “hot-stage” section. “The four open environmental issues are illustrative of the difficulties launch companies face in the current regulatory environment for launch and reentry licensing,” the company said. SpaceX also sent a separate letter to the committee on its licensing concerns that was entered into the record.
Rep. Mike Garcia (R-Calif.) mentioned the Starship licensing delays in the hearing. He said that the FAA had promised to make a determination on SpaceX’s license modification for the next flight by Sept. 17, but the company was informed a week ago that it would be delayed to Nov. 22 and, later, to Nov. 26. That put the FAA on track to miss the 180-day deadline, he claimed.
Coleman mentioned the Starship license, which is under Part 450, later in the hearing. “SpaceX has four flights under its belt, three of which have been under modifications to the license that have been requested by the company,” he said. Those modifications are caused by changes in the mission or the vehicle. “It is the company that is pushing mission-by-mission approvals. That’s what the pace is about.”
That answer was unsatisfactory for one member of the committee. “You do realize that technology changes literally every day?” Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) told Coleman. “You’re in charge. You make the difference. You get to determine how fast these go through, and if what you’re doing is not working, you need to change.”
