February 6, 2004 ( Via E Mail Fox. John@ epamail. epa. gov) John Fox Office of Science and Technology Office of Water U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( 4303T) 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20460 Re: Port Townsend Paper Corporation Preliminary Comments on EPA Approach to Cooling Water Intake Structure Phase III Rulemaking Dear Mr. Fox:

Port Townsend Paper is pleased to submit these comments on EPA's proposed approach to Phase III of the Cooling Water Intake Structure ( CWIS) rulemaking under Section 316( b) of the Clean Water Act. I have consulted with Meg McCarthy of the American Forest & Paper Association in the preparation of these comments, as she attended the outreach meeting EPA held last month. While I am writing these comments from the perspective of a small business, the alternatives proposed within these comments could be applied more generally to all Phase III facilities since, on the whole, these facilities' cooling water intake structures have not been identified as causing adverse environmental impacts.

As a small business, Port Townsend Paper is concerned about the potential costs and burdens that may be imposed by the Phase III rulemaking. Port Townsend Paper, like many small paper manufacturers, currently is facing significant economic challenges. The recent economic slump and shifting markets resulted in the closure of our two bag plants and the loss of over 200 jobs. In addition, the weak global economy has limited sales overseas. While there has been an upturn in the global and domestic markets recently, we still have not seen a significant improvement in our businesses. Capital expenditure has been restricted and further downsizing of our remaining personnel has occurred. Our limited resources must be spent wisely to insure our continued existence. Any additional costs will only exacerbate that economic challenge. For example, the initial capital cost of retrofitting a facility with an intake technology plus the compliance costs of annual monitoring and reporting, as estimated by the EPA, would pose a substantial financial burden on small businesses such as Port Townsend Paper. 2 Additionally, according to the Small Business Administration's analysis of the benefits and costs of some of the regulatory alternatives for the Phase III rulemaking, the permitting, monitoring and reporting costs were considerably greater than the capital costs and operating costs of the technologies used to minimize environmental impact. SBA also indicates that the cost benefit ratio for the rulemaking would improve if regulatory alternatives were adopted that deregulate smaller facilities, eliminating cumbersome regulations on small entities that provide few environmental benefits per dollar invested.

Our comments are premised on the notion that despite decades of operation, the cooling water intake structures operated by Port Townsend Paper and other Phase III facilities are not thought to present an adverse environmental impact to the aquatic resources located near those intakes. Port Townsend Paper would support the following regulatory approaches for the Phase III rulemaking that take this into account.

1. EPA should consider not applying comprehensive national regulations to all Phase III facilities. There are several alternatives that EPA could utilize to determine which facilities would be regulated. Options include:

  EPA should focus the Phase III rulemaking only on facilities with a reasonable likelihood of causing adverse environmental impact ( AEI) through cooling water withdrawals. As an initial matter, EPA should establish one or more applicability thresholds and exempt from the scope of the rulemaking, facilities that do not fall within those thresholds. The authority to seek additional studies or impose additional requirements should be appropriately limited. Stakeholders have suggested various de minimus applicability thresholds ranging from 10 250 mgd. For example, SBA suggests that facilities withdrawing less than 20 million gallons per day ( mgd) should be outside the scope of the rulemaking, absent some unusual site specific factor that would cause a permit writer to seek additional study or impose additional requirements. Further investigation into the costs and benefits of each of the various threshold levels should be conducted.

  Additionally, if EPA uses the amount of water withdrawal as an applicability criterion, Port Townsend Paper suggests that EPA base that criterion on actual intake flow, as opposed to the design intake flow. Many manufacturers, including small businesses, are already functioning with lower intake and discharge volumes as required by their NPDES permits or have a demonstrated track record of lower water withdrawal. By basing the flow threshold on design intake without considering that the actual intake volume may be significantly lower, the EPA is in effect penalizing facilities for conserving water. Port Townsend suggests that the EPA utilize the more reasonable and consistent alternative of basing the flow threshold on past actual intake volume, not on design intake volume.

  Alternatively, EPA should exclude all Phase III facilities from regulation except in those cases where the permit writer determines that based on available scientific data a CWIS has resulted in an adverse environmental impact. For those facilities the permit writer should use best professional judgment to include in the facility's NPDES permit provisions for the application of best technology available or equivalent ( see below) to minimize that impact. 3 2. Port Townsend Paper would support alternative regulatory approaches for those facilities that fall within the scope of the Phase III rulemaking in order to lessen the effect of the rule on small businesses.

  Best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact could be defined by EPA as a designated suite of technologies for facilities that fall within the scope of the rulemaking in order to reduce the economic burden posed by the considerable permitting, monitoring and reporting costs. Plants that agree to install an approved technology would be considered to be in compliance with Section 316( b) and not be subject to extensive monitoring costs and burdensome reporting requirements.

  EPA should consider regulating only impingement ( not entrainment) at plants in appropriate circumstances. EPRI has produced a report that shows that in many instances a significant water withdrawal and healthy fish populations can co exist, so the risks of dropping entrainment controls for plants in this category are likely to be small while cost savings would be significant.

  EPA should consider identifying industrial subcategories that could be adversely affected by the Phase III rulemaking and reducing the rulemaking's economic burden for these subcategories.

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the SBREFA process and to comment on the development of regulations to establish requirements for Cooling Water Intake Structures at Section 316( b) Phase III Facilities. Please feel free to contact me at ( 360) 379 2112 if you have any questions about these comments.

Sincerely,

Eveleen Muehlethaler Vice President, Asst. Mill Manager Port Townsend Paper Corporation


[Federal Register: January 23, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 15)]
[Notices]
[Page 4040-4043]
[DOCID:fr23ja08-101]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Finding of No Significant Impact

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Environmental Finding Document: Finding of No Significant
Impact; Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA participated as a cooperating agency with the U.S.
Army Space and Missile Defense Command/U.S. Army Forces Strategic
Command in preparation of the SpaceX Falcon Program Environmental
Assessment (EA). The Falcon Launch Vehicle Program is a venture by
Space Exploration Technologies, Inc. (SpaceX) to provide space launch
operations. The EA analyzed the environmental consequences of
conducting an average of six Falcon 1 launches per year and up to four
Falcon 9 launches per year (starting after 2008) for the next ten years
from Omelek Island, U.S. Army Kwajalein Atoll Ronald Reagan Ballistic
Missile Test Site (USAKA/RTS). The EA also analyzed the reentry of the
Dragon reentry capsule, which would be carried as a payload on the
Falcon 9 launch vehicle. Additionally, the SpaceX Falcon Program EA
analyzed infrastructure improvements proposed on Omelek Island and
Kwajalein to support the proposed launch activities. SpaceX would
require a launch or reentry license from the FAA for launches or
reentries of commercial payloads.
    From its independent review and consideration, the FAA has
determined that the FAA's proposed action is substantially the same as
the actions already analyzed in the SpaceX EA and that FAA's comments
and suggestions have been satisfied (see 1506.3(c) and FAA Order
1050.1E, 518h). The FAA formally adopts the EA and hereby incorporates
the analysis to support future decisions on license applications.
    After reviewing and analyzing currently available data and
information on existing conditions, project impacts, and measures to
mitigate those impacts, the FAA has determined that the proposed action
is not a Federal action that would significantly affect the quality of
the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA). Therefore, the preparation of an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) is not required and the FAA is issuing a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The FAA made this determination in
accordance with all applicable environmental laws.
    For a Copy of the Environmental Assessment or the FONSI Contact:
Questions or comments should be directed to Ms. Stacey Zee; FAA
Environmental Specialist; Federal Aviation Administration; 800
Independence Ave., SW.; AST-100,

Suite 331; Washington, DC 20591;<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Background

    Launches of launch vehicles and the reentry of reentry vehicles
must be licensed by the FAA pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 70101-70121, the
Commercial Space Launch Act. Issuing a launch or reentry license is a
Federal action requiring environmental analysis by the FAA in
accordance with NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. Upon receipt of a complete
license application, the FAA must evaluate the information and
determine whether to issue a launch or reentry license to SpaceX, as
appropriate. The FAA would use the analyses in the SpaceX Falcon
Program EA as the basis for the environmental determination of the
impacts to support licensing launches of the Falcon 1 launch vehicle or
the Falcon 9 launch vehicle from Omelek Island and/or the reentry of
Dragon reentry vehicle. The issuance of a FONSI does not guarantee that
a license will be issued by the FAA for the launch of the Falcon launch
vehicles or the reentry of the Dragon capsule. It also must meet all
safety, risk and indemnification requirements.

Proposed Action

    SpaceX is proposing to launch the Falcon 1 and the Falcon 9 launch
vehicles and the Dragon reentry capsule from Omelek Island, USAKA/RTS.
The Falcon 1 is a small, unmanned, two-stage launch vehicle designed to
put small payloads into orbit. The vehicle uses liquid oxygen (LOX) and
kerosene as propellants. The first stage is recoverable by use of a
parachute. The second stage is not reusable and is not intended to be
recovered.
    The Falcon 9 is a two-stage, medium class, liquid launch vehicle
designed to put space systems and satellites into orbit. Falcon 9 uses
LOX and kerosene as propellants. The first stage is recoverable by use
of a parachute. The second stage would be reused when launch
inclination, payload requirements, and weight allow for its recovery.
    The Dragon capsule would be carried as a payload on the Falcon 9
vehicle. The Dragon capsule is being developed to deliver cargo to the
International Space Station under contract with the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration. Following its mission to deliver
cargo to the ISS, the Dragon would reenter the atmosphere and would be
recovered similar to the Falcon 9 first stage. The capsule may or may
not be refurbished or reused. Locations in the Gulf of Mexico, the
coast of California, and the Kwajalein Atoll are being considered as
recovery zones.
    SpaceX has proposed several infrastructure improvements to Omelek
Island to support the proposed launch activities, including
construction of a Falcon 9 launch pad and a hangar facility, upgrades
to existing propellant storage and loading facilities, and several
other facility improvements. SpaceX has also proposed the construction
of a LOX plant facility and a Payload Processing Facility on Kwajalein.
    Under the No Action Alternative, the proposed Falcon launch
activities would not be conducted at Omelek, and SpaceX would not
proceed with further construction or modification efforts at USAKA. No
additional launches would take place beyond the five that have been
authorized.

Environmental Impacts

    The following presents a brief summary of the environmental impacts
considered in the SpaceX Falcon Program EA. The SpaceX Falcon Program
EA is incorporated by reference in this FONSI and the FAA's FONSI is
based upon the impacts discussed in that EA.
    Air Quality: Emissions from site preparation activities are not
expected to exceed USAKA Environmental Standards (UES). Levels of
generator emissions are not expected to impact the regional air quality
or exceed the USAKA ambient air standards. However, generators may not
be in compliance with the incremental degradation standards allowable
by the UES. Operational measures, such as limiting fuel consumption or
increasing stack height, would be enacted to ensure generator
compliance with the UES incremental degradation standards and USAKA
ambient air standards. The operation of the proposed LOX plant on
Kwajalein would use the existing power supply on Kwajalein that is
already subject to the Army's current Document of Environmental
Protection (DEP) (U.S. Army Kwajalein Atoll/Kwajalein Missile Range
1999. Document of Environmental Protection (DEP), Activity: Air
Emissions from Major Stationary Sources at USAKA/KMR [Modified November
2000], November).
    Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 launches would have only a localized, minimal
impact on air quality. Long-term effects are not expected because the
launches would be infrequent and the resulting emissions would be
rapidly dispersed and diluted by trade winds. Regional air quality
would not be impacted and USAKA ambient air quality standards would not
be exceeded by launches of the Falcon launch vehicles or reentry of the
Dragon vehicle. No significant impacts to air quality are expected.
    Airspace: USAKA/RTS is located under international airspace and
therefore, has no formal airspace restrictions governing it. Bucholz
Army Airfield is approximately 35 kilometers (22 miles) south of the
Omelek launch site. Although site preparation activities may involve
flights in and out of Bucholz Army Airfield, they would not restrict
access to, nor affect the use of the Airfield. Falcon 1 and Falcon 9
launches could potentially impact flight patterns for military aircraft
in the area. However, SpaceX would coordinate Falcon launches with the
FAA and USAKA/RTS Commander, which would include scheduling launches to
avoid airspace conflicts. No significant impacts to airspace are
expected.
    Biological Resources: Site preparation activities would result in
the removal of trees and vegetation from existing non-forested areas
and some forested areas (primarily Pisonia trees) from the north point,
south point, and along the west coast of the island totaling
approximately 10 percent of the total acreage of Omelek. Additionally,
some trees would need to be removed around the Falcon 1 launch site,
and from the area of the Falcon 9 hangar. No threatened or endangered
vegetation has been identified in the area.
    Construction noise and the increased presence of personnel could
temporarily affect wildlife in the area. Construction ground
disturbance and equipment noise-related impacts could include a loss of
habitat, displacement of wildlife, and short-term disruption of daily/
seasonal behavior. Vegetation removal would likely result in the
permanent removal of some of the habitat available for nesting seabirds
or foraging shorebirds on Omelek.
    Sedimentation from the installation of pilings and a concrete
barge-dock 3 meters (10 feet) into the harbor could temporarily degrade
water quality in the vicinity due to short-term turbidity. Effects to
reef fish and benthic species would be temporary. Work would be delayed
if threatened or endangered species are observed in the area.
    Potential habitat for sea turtles on Omelek includes sandy beaches
along the southern and northern tips of the island and the area of the
lagoon shoreline from the northern tip of the island south to the north
jetty. Personnel would be instructed to avoid all contact with sea
turtles or turtle nests that might occur within the area. Within two
hours prior to the launch, SpaceX personnel would survey the shoreline
100 meters (328 feet) on both

sides of the launch site to determine whether sea turtles are present
or hauling out in the area. If turtles are observed in the area, SpaceX
would consult with USAKA Environmental before continuing with launch
activities. A fence may be required to prevent a sea turtle take during
launches.
    Disturbances to vegetation and wildlife during Falcon launches
would be minimal and brief. Based on existing analyses of prior and
current launches within the region, launch disturbances on migratory
birds, threatened or endangered species and other wildlife would be
minimal. There is a very small possibility that debris or booster drops
could impact migratory whales or sea turtles; however, the majority of
the potential impact area is open ocean, where the probability of
impacting a species would be very low. No significant impacts to
biological resources are expected.
    Cultural Resources: All ground-disturbing activities would be
planned so that archeologically sensitive areas such as those areas at
the northern portion of the islet would be avoided to the extent
possible. If the proposed facilities cannot be located to avoid these
areas, archeological monitoring with systemic sampling as necessary
would accompany construction of any facilities. To minimize
disturbances to cultural resources, appropriate measures would be
taken, such as installing signage to designate sensitive areas and
educating facility personnel about protecting sensitive island
resources.
    Personnel involved in launch and other operational activities would
follow UES requirements in handling or avoiding any cultural resources
uncovered during operational or monitoring activities. In addition, no
structures eligible for listing on the Republic of the Marshall Islands
(RMI) National Register have been identified on Omelek. No significant
impacts to cultural resources are anticipated.
    Geology and Soils: Due to the minimal duration of site preparation
activities, and adherence to Best Management Practices and the USAKA
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, adverse geological or soil
impacts are not anticipated.
    Falcon launch vehicle emissions would consist mainly of carbon
monoxide, carbon dioxide, hydrogen and water and would not result in
any impacts to geology or soils. There would be a slight risk of soil
contamination from accidental spills of propellants or premature flight
termination; however, this risk would be minimized because emergency
response personnel would comply with the UES, the Emergency Response
Plan prepared by SpaceX, and the Kwajalein Environmental Emergency
Plan. No significant impacts to geology and soils are expected.
    Hazardous Materials and Waste: All hazardous materials used and
waste generated during site preparation activities would be handled,
transported, stored, treated, and disposed of off-site in accordance
with a Hazardous Materials Contingency Plan and Hazardous Waste
Management Plan, which would be prepared by SpaceX. These plans would
follow regulations established in the UES and the Kwajalein
Environmental Emergency Plan.
    Materials proposed for use as a result of the proposed action are
similar to hazardous materials already in use for other operations at
USAKA/RTS. Hazardous materials associated with the proposed action
would represent only a small increase in the total amount of materials
handled and could easily be accommodated by existing hazardous
materials management systems.
    Hazardous waste management at USAKA/RTS would continue to be
performed in accordance with the UES, which requires hazardous waste to
be shipped to the continental United States for treatment and/or
disposal. A trained immediate spill response team would be established
onsite, and spills would be contained and cleaned up according to the
procedures identified in the Kwajalein Environmental Emergency Plan and
a SpaceX-specific emergency plan. Therefore, there would not be a
significant impact from hazardous materials and hazardous waste
management.
    Health and Safety: Proposed construction activities would comply
with all applicable UES and USAKA/RTS Range Safety Requirements.
Additionally, Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 launches would comply with all UES
and USAKA/RTS Range Safety Requirements.
    All operations involving explosives would require implementation of
a written procedure, approved by the USAKA/RTS safety office. These
operations would be conducted under the supervision of an approved
ordnance officer using explosive-certified personnel.
    The Range Safety Officer would review and agree on all missile
flight safety specifications prior to all Falcon 1 or Falcon 9
launches. Protection circles, based on the payload, missile and launch
azimuth, would be established for each launch. Access to Omelek would
be limited to all but mission essential personnel, and personnel would
be evacuated from the islet prior to launch. Therefore, significant
impacts to health and safety would not be expected.
    Infrastructure: The proposed new helipad would be located on the
southeast side of the island in order to reduce the potential of
impacting the approach and departure path when additional facilities
are added.
    Unimproved paths used to access the island would be paved. Road
design would include an evaluation of rainwater drainage on Omelek, and
rainwater control channels or conduit would be installed during paving
construction. SpaceX would manage rainwater run-off from paved areas on
Omelek by allowing run-off to drain naturally along the access road to
the north and along the paved roads to the east toward vegetated areas,
and by constructing surface or underground culverts to divert water
from the central and southern portions of the island to the harbor.
    Power, communications, water, and sewage would be routed through
new underground conduits to and from the facilities. Additional
trenching would be required in several areas to extend power and
communication availability to the new facilities. Construction would
include a generator facility with ample power to support proposed
launch activities. A Kerosene Propellant, Diesel Fluid, and Water
Storage Area on Omelek would be developed to store kerosene and diesel
fuel in aboveground tanks or standardized containers, within a concrete
containment area. A proposed reverse osmosis system would generate
approximately 11,356 liters (3,000) gallons of water per day to support
the deluge system; water would be stored in the proposed new Kerosene
Propellant, Diesel Fluid, and Water Storage Area.
    The demand on electrical, wastewater, solid waste, and water
systems to support the storage facility is expected to be within the
current capacity of utility systems on Kwajalein and Meck. No
significant impacts to existing infrastructure are expected.
    Land Use: Construction and operation of proposed facilities and
upgrades to existing facilities would not change any existing land uses
on Omelek or Kwajalein. Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 launches would be
entirely consistent with the mission of the island and would not
conflict with any known land use plans, policies, or controls at USAKA.
    The establishment and activation of a launch hazard area would
require the temporary clearance of the Pacific Ocean area adjacent to
the launch site. Temporary clearance of this launch

hazard area should have no impacts on recreational or commercial use of
these waters since the area off the island is not used frequently by
commercial fisherman or for recreational use by residents of USAKA/RTS.
No significant impacts to land use are expected.
    Noise: Noise produced during site preparation activities would be
minor and short-term, resulting in little to no effect on construction
workers or launch personnel. To minimize noise level impacts, all
personnel or contractors involved in construction activities would wear
hearing protection in areas where noise levels would exceed limits set
by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
    No sensitive noise receptors are in the vicinity of Omelek. The
island has been developed solely as a launch support facility with no
permanent inhabitants, and there are no inhabited islands within 21
kilometers (13 miles) of the site; therefore, no significant noise
impacts from launch activities are expected.
    Socioeconomics: Approximately 30 people would be involved in both
Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 launch activities. Up to 8 of the 30 SpaceX
personnel would live temporarily on Omelek in the SpaceX office
facility, as necessary. The remaining transient personnel would reside
on Kwajalein and would commute daily between the two islands. No
additional facilities would be required to house personnel.
    Launch procedures on Omelek could continue to employ a small number
of Marshallese from Ebeye and possibly from Majuro in support of ground
and facility maintenance. The personal income of the three to seven
Marshallese employed to support the launches from Omelek may increase.
There would be no impact on the permanent population size, employment
characteristics, and the type of housing available on Ebeye and Majuro.
No significant impacts to socioeconomics are expected.
    Water Resources: Construction of the new Falcon 9 launch pad and
the Payload Processing Facility would be confined within the immediate
construction area in compliance with the UES and would thus not impact
water resources. Proposed construction activities would be performed in
accordance with the USAKA Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan to
minimize potential erosion and stormwater runoff. Impacts to the waters
surrounding Omelek due to stormwater runoff would be in compliance with
the UES nonpoint source requirements and the USAKA Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan. Best Management Practices would be used to limit
turbidity during installation of new pilings and the proposed concrete
barge dock.
    There is the potential for carbonic acid (a mild acid similar to
that in a carbonated beverage) to be produced during launch from the
reaction of carbon dioxide in the exhaust plume and water. This
carbonic acid would be expected to rapidly evaporate and would have a
similar pH to that of rainwater; therefore, no impacts to water
resources would be expected to occur from launch emissions.
    There is the potential for an accidental propellant spill or
premature flight termination to result in released propellant
contaminating water resources. This risk, however, would be minimized
through compliance with the Hazardous Materials Contingency Plan and
Hazardous Waste Management Plan prepared by SpaceX and the Kwajalein
Environmental Management Plan. No significant impacts to water
resources are expected.
    Cumulative Impacts: The proposed action would not occur at the same
time as other programs such as Ground-Based Midcourse Defense or
Minuteman III planned for the region. The increased size and use of the
power station may not comply with the allowable UES incremental
degradation standards. Operational options, including a wind-based
generator or limiting fuel consumption, are available that would
achieve compliance with ambient air quality and incremental degradation
standards. With the implementation of such options, it is not likely
that the proposed action at Omelek would result in significant
cumulative impacts to the regional air quality.
    Launches are short-term, discrete events, thus allowing time
between launches for emission products to be dispersed and minimizing
the potential for impacts to airspace users, biological resources, and
public health and safety. Using the required scheduling process for
international airspace would minimize the potential for cumulative
impacts to the airspace above the open ocean. The loss of approximately
12 percent of the vegetation on Omelek would contribute cumulatively to
the reduction of wildlife habitat in the area. No significant
cumulative impacts to terrestrial or marine biological resources have
been identified as a result of prior launch-related activities in the
region. Avoidance would minimize the potential for cumulative cultural
resources impacts. Preparation of the launch site and adherence to
established hazardous waste and spill prevention procedures and
regulations would minimize the potential for cumulative impacts to
geology or soils.
    Adherence to the hazardous materials and waste management systems
of USAKA/RTS and SpaceX would preclude the potential accumulation of
hazardous materials or waste. Adherence to the high safety standards at
USAKA/RTS would serve to keep any cumulative safety impacts
attributable to all USAKA/RTS operations within acceptable standards to
both workers and the public. The additional demand on transportation,
electrical, wastewater, solid waste, and water systems to support the
small number of project-related personnel would be accomplished by the
proposed infrastructure upgrades or be within the current capacity of
USAKA/RTS. The sound level generated by each Falcon launch would be a
short, discrete event and no cumulative noise impacts are anticipated.
Adherence to established hazardous waste and spill prevention
procedures and regulations would minimize the potential for cumulative
impacts to water resources.
    Determination: An analysis of the proposed action has concluded
that there are no significant short-term or long-term effects to the
environment or surrounding populations. After careful and thorough
consideration of the facts herein, the undersigned finds that the
proposed Federal action is consistent with existing national
environmental policies and objectives set forth in section 101(a) of
the NEPA and other applicable environmental requirements and will not
significantly affect the quality of the human environment or otherwise
include any condition requiring consultation pursuant to section
102(2)(c) of NEPA. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement for the
proposed action is not required.

    Date Issued: January 10, 2008, Washington, DC.
Patricia Grace Smith,
Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation.
[FR Doc. E8-1068 Filed 1-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P