There have been headlines in the news aggregators for the last couple of days that FAA has announced big fines against SpaceX for alleged safety violations. The number being quoted is $633,000. Today, the story was changed to SpaceX saying they'll sue the FAA for regulatory overreach.
A bit of research reveals the stories behind the fines and I can't help but see this as increasing the lawfare against SpaceX. SpaceNews sums up the situation well. These fines are related to two launches in 2023.
The FAA announced Sept. 17 that it notified SpaceX of $633,009 in proposed fines for violating terms of its launch licenses during the June 2023 Falcon 9 launch of the Satria-1, or PSN Satria, broadband satellite and the July 2023 Falcon Heavy launch of Jupiter-3, or EchoStar-24, broadband satellite. Both launches were successful.
The exact details of both incidents are rather different. What they share in
common is that SpaceX wanted to make a change to maintain or improve their
operations and the FAA couldn't keep up with SpaceX.
In the Satria-1 case, SpaceX had requested changes to the FAA in May of 2023 to (1) allow the use of a new launch control center in the company’s “Hangar X” facility at the Kennedy Space Center and (2) they wanted to skip a poll of launch controllers at two hours before liftoff, apparently believing it wasn't really adding any value to their operations.
The FAA notified SpaceX "shortly before the scheduled launch" that it would not be able to approve those changes and modify the license in time, although the notice didn't state why. The article from SpaceNews never says exactly how close to the launch SpaceX was notified that the FAA would not modify their launch license to allow these two things. With no approval, someone decided to just go ahead and do what they needed to do. The FAA is fining them $350,000 for that launch.
The July Falcon Heavy launch isn't exactly the same, but "it rhymes."
Nine days before the launch, SpaceX asked the FAA for a modification to its
launch license to allow it to use a new tank farm for RP-1 fuel at KSC’s
Launch Complex 39A. The FAA notified SpaceX two days before the scheduled
launch that they would not be able to modify the license in time, but SpaceX
went ahead and used the new tank farm for the launch. The FAA is fining
them $283,009 for that launch violation.
The FAA insists that their actions are always motivated by safety but it's hard for me to see any safety connection.
In the first case, nobody in their right mind would put a new launch control center in operation without testing it through every imaginable situation, nor would taking a poll of controllers at T-2 hours when there's a completely redundant such poll later in the countdown add anything. These polls are summaries of real time checks and tests, they really aren't what determines Go or No Go. Problems are found throughout the countdown.
In the second case, they used a new fuel tank. So what? Again, nobody that's going to work around one of those tanks, or depend on them for mission success, would put a tank in operation without testing it every way imaginable.
For both incidents, SpaceX has 30 days to respond, with the option of participating in an “informal conference” with agency attorneys and submitting information to explain what happened.
Musk, though, suggested SpaceX would take the FAA to court rather than use those administrative procedures. “SpaceX will be filing suit against the FAA for regulatory overreach,” he posted on X, the social media platform he also owns.
Musk claimed in other posts the fines were “lawfare” by the FAA against SpaceX. “I am highly confident that discovery will show improper, politically-motivated behavior by the FAA,” he argued, but provided no evidence to support his claim.
The Falcon Heavy launch of the Jupiter-3 Satellite, July 28, 2023. Image credit: SpaceX
It may be lawfare or it may simply be the exceptional egotism all federal regulators seem to have. They're not good enough to grade SpaceX, they're not good enough to understand what a leading edge company like SpaceX is doing, but their egos say they are.
It's lawfare.
ReplyDeletePolitics.
ReplyDeleteTotal lawfare and pushback by the current administration against SpaceX and Musk.
ReplyDeleteThis is why we need Trump to win and survive to Jan 20, 2025 and beyond.
What next? Not using 'FAA approved' toilet paper in 'FAA approved' bathrooms?
I've said it before and I'll say it again. There exists within the FAA a great latitude for an individual to use the weight of the agency to carry out a personal vendetta against private business.
ReplyDeleteThat means it is possible that even one person at FAA could be at the bottom of this. Whether it is a single individual, a group, or an entire department, or the entire administration, in each case they use the weight of the agency as a cudgel.
I am so very not kidding. The FAA too often does act like a Mafia. Yes, I have the receipts, as they say.
What SiG writes in tonight's post is not all inclusive. This is only the latest, perhaps the most egregious, of a sting of such actions against Elon, er, uh, I mean Space X.
I would not be surprised if other countries are involved in this lawfare.
My bet is that the "discovery" process will not find anything against the FAA. The government has been VERY good at that for many years now. On the other hand, discovery works BOTH ways, and SpaceX should expect to lose much proprietary information to the public when the FedGov looks at THEM!
ReplyDeleteAnd that applies regardless of WHO wins in November. Deep State is truly real.
Certainly the FAA will be destroying evidence detrimental to FAA's position. However, SpaceX can also look at all other instances of such actions the FAA has taken. Not just limited to rocket companies, we need to see that FAA has cracked down on all the airlines in the country that have changed their IT setups without permission. Because FAA takes safety very seriously.
DeleteThe FAA's motto used to be, "We're here to help." Now it's, "We're not happy till you're not Happy."
ReplyDeleteI assume SpaceX is still scheduled to rescue the stranded Boeing astronauts in February. I also assume NASA and/or Boeing are paying for the rescue. Perhaps Musk should have his bean-counters run the numbers again. It is quite possible they missed $633,009 in additional expenses for that mission.
ReplyDeleteRick's comment is apropos of many regulatory agencies - individuals have a wide latitude of regulatory discretion within the regulations that apply.
ReplyDeleteIf this keeps up - on so many fronts - the US will drive all innovation and future development from its shores, leaving us with organizations and companies that are more concerned with toeing the government line than producing product for the present and future.
Another issue here is overly restrictive plans - the plan SpaceX asked the FAA to approve should have set standards for their fuel farm and flight polls, it almost certainly shouldn't have set the details right enough for this to matter.
ReplyDeleteAs someone who works in federal permitting and plan approvals, it is common for plans to get more specific than needed, which then requires approval of modifications that shouldn't have been needed.
Where I work, we try to avoid over specifying parameters like this because of the extra work it generates for everybody involved.
Jonathan
P.S. This is not to say that there isn't a person of persons making trouble for SpaceX. That is entirely possible; they could have gone through the paperwork looking for violations and then pushed through the system something that usually would get ignored.
Anyone with the IQ of soap knows this is the swamp attacking Musk who is right behind Trump on the list of people they hate and seek to destroy.
ReplyDeleteKNOW that under the Communist Biden Regime we are all slaves to Marxist rule. Every Federal Agency is weaponized against innovation and advancement and unless its Green its an enemy movement. If we dont fight the Regime to the death we will be forever enslaved.
ReplyDelete