COMSTAC STOWG Commercial Aerospaceports Licensing and Development

Objective Introduce subject to STOWG as key topic – Regular follow up Receive feedback – Develop as required Determine key subject dimensions Record initial group observations, findings and recommendations Background – RS&H Cecil Field, Florida Licensing Project – IFGDade-Collier, Florida Feasibility Study 10/13/20112COMSTAC STOWG

Agenda Suggested development discussion: – Licensing – Economics-Business Case Stakeholders, Cost-Benefit Investments - Financing – Private Users: Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, Xcor – Public Space Transportation Infrastructure Matching (STIM) Grants – Education/Public/Media/PR – Strategies 10/13/20113COMSTAC STOWG

Licensing (Regulations, Technologies) 14 CFR Part 420 – Notice of Proposed Rule Making – Feb 2011 Revises Separation Distance Approaches Aerospaceports vs Traditional Range Launch Sites Common RLV Propellants vs Traditional Point to Point, CONUS vs OCONUS 10/13/20114COMSTAC STOWG

Proposed Observation #1 COMSTAC observes that the Notice of Proposed Rule Making related to 14 CFR Part 420 on February 16, 2011 includes positive changes to Part 420 based on experience gained during the licensing of a number of spaceports. 10/13/20115COMSTAC STOWG

Proposed Finding #1 COMSTAC finds that 14 CFR Part 420 is a better fit for traditional launch sites than aerospace ports. In addition, the rules are a better fit for traditional launch vehicles than the type that typically operate from an aerospace port. 10/13/20116COMSTAC STOWG

Proposed Recommendation #1 COMSTAC recommends that 14 CFR Part 420 Appendix E be updated to include: – Explosive Equivalents for Hybrid Launch Vehicles – Intraline Distances for common energetic liquids 10/13/20117COMSTAC STOWG

Contacts Brian Gulliver, PE – RS&H – Spaceport Planning / Mechanical Engineer – – (386) Oscar S. García – IFG – Chairman – – (305) /13/20118COMSTAC STOWG