FINAL REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY LAUNCH RANGE Prepared for National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center Wallops Flight Facility Wallops Island, VA 23337 August 2009 Prepared by URS Group, Inc. 200 Orchard Ridge Drive, Suite 101 Gaithersburg, MD 20878 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EXPANSION OF THE WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY LAUNCH RANGE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY WALLOPS ISLAND, VA 23337 Lead Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration Cooperating Agency: Federal Aviation Administration Office of Commercial Space Transportation Proposed Action: Expansion of the Wallops Flight Facility Launch Range on Wallops Island, Virginia For Further Information: Joshua A. Bundick NEPA Program Manager Code 250.W Goddard Space Flight Center’s Wallops Flight Facility National Aeronautics and Space Administration Wallops Island, VA 23337 (757) 824-1579 Date: August 2009 This page intentionally left blank. Executive Summary ABSTRACT This Environmental Assessment addresses the proposed expansion of the launch range at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), which is located on the Eastern Shore of Virginia. Under the Proposed Action, NASA and Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport (MARS) facilities would be upgraded to support up to and including medium large class suborbital and orbital expendable launch vehicle (ELV) launch activities from WFF. The Proposed Action would have both adverse and beneficial impacts to environmental and socioeconomic resources; however, most adverse impacts are minor and of short duration. Adverse impacts would be mitigated to the greatest extent practicable to minimize the effects on resources. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE ACTION The purpose of the Proposed Action is to expand and enhance the respective NASA and MARS facilities at WFF such that they are able to accommodate a wider variety of new launch vehicles and payloads. The expansion would be consistent with national space policies, including the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 and the 1994 National Space Transportation Policy, both of which contain the primary objective of keeping the United States at the forefront of space transportation technology. The Proposed Action is needed to support NASA’s mission and further the objectives of the U.S. space policy by enhancing the ability of NASA’s WFF and MARS to serve the rapidly growing civil, defense, academic, and commercial aerospace market. Additionally, WFF and MARS are located within the only NASA-controlled launch range, and therefore they provide an established location solely under NASA control and focused on NASA’s schedule, budget, and mission objectives. Additionally, under Title II of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-8), the U.S. Congress appropriated $14,000,000 specifically to WFF and stated “WFF is an important national asset that can be better utilized by focusing on emerging technologies that meet national needs and NASA priorities.” Implementation of the Proposed Action would fulfill this Congressional directive. ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTIONS No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, NASA and MARS would not expand launch activities at WFF. The full potential of the launch range capacity at WFF would not be utilized in support of the WFF and MARS missions. Existing launch activities, which consist of a maximum of 12 orbital rocket launches per year from Pad 0-B, would continue. Alternative One Under Alternative One NASA and MARS would expand and upgrade facilities to support up to and including medium large class suborbital and orbital ELV launch activities from WFF. Components of Alternative One include site improvements required to support launch operations (such as facility construction and infrastructure improvements); testing, fueling, and processing operations; up to two static fire tests per year; and launching of up to six ELVs and associated 26-AUG-09\\ i Executive Summary spacecraft per year from Pad 0-A. Orbital Sciences Corporation’s Taurus II ELV would be the largest ELV that would be launched from Pad 0-A. Implementation of Alternative One would result in a maximum of 18 orbital-class launches from MARS Launch Complex 0 per year (12 existing launches from Pad 0-B, and 6 additional launches from Pad 0-A). Site Improvements to Support Launch Operations NASA would implement the following: • Minor modifications to the boat dock on the north end of Wallops Island; • Construction of a Payload Processing Facility (PPF); • Construction of a dedicated Payload Fueling Facility (PFF); • Construction of a Horizontal Integration Facility (HIF); • Construction of new roads and minor upgrades to existing roads; and • Minor interior modifications to launch support facilities. MARS would implement the following: • Construction of a new launch complex in approximately the same location as the existing Pad 0-A, including a Liquid Fueling Facility (LFF). Transportation, Handling, and Storage The transportation and handling of various cargo, launch vehicle, and payload components would be ongoing as the components are delivered to Wallops Main Base or Wallops Island via truck, barge, rail, or airplane, and then transported via road to various facilities and the launch pad. Alternative Two Under Alternative Two, NASA and MARS would maximize the use of existing facilities to support up to and including medium large class suborbital and orbital ELV launch activities from WFF. Alternative Two includes site improvements required to support launch operations; testing, fueling, and processing operations; and up to two static fire tests per year. A maximum of three orbital-class launches per year would occur from Pad 0-A with Orbital Sciences Corporation’s Taurus II ELV being the largest ELV. Implementation of Alternative Two would result in a maximum of 15 orbital-class launches from MARS Launch Complex 0 per year (12 existing launches from Pad 0-B, and 3 additional launches from Pad 0-A). Site Improvements to Support Launch Operations NASA would implement the following: • Minor modifications to the boat dock on the north end of Wallops Island; • Construction of a “high-bay” addition to Building V-45 to be used for payload processing; • Construction of new roads and minor upgrades to existing roads; and • Minor interior modifications to launch support facilities. MARS would implement the following: 26-AUG-09\\ ii Executive Summary • Construction of a new launch complex in approximately the same location as the existing Pad 0-A, including an LFF. Transportation, Handling, and Storage The transportation and handling of various cargo, launch vehicle, and payload components would be ongoing as the components are delivered to Wallops Main Base or Island via truck, barge, rail, or airplane, and then transported via road to various facilities and the launch pad. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Under the No Action Alternative, activities would remain at present levels and there would be no additional impacts to environmental resources. Potential environmental impacts resulting from the proposed action alternatives are summarized below. Resource Alternative One Alternative Two Topography Site improvement activities would not Under Alternative Two, less ground substantially alter topography; therefore, disturbance would occur compared to changes to natural drainage patterns would Alternative One, so there would be be minor. fewer changes to topography from site improvements. Geology and Construction activities along with spills or Impacts to soils and geology would be Soils leaks of pollutants that may occur during the same as those described for construction or transportation of materials Alternative One, although fewer would have the potential to affect soils. impacts would occur due to 50 percent NASA and MARS would implement site- less site disturbance. specific best management practices for vehicle and equipment fueling and maintenance, and spill prevention and control measures. Driven piles would create long-term changes to the subsurface geology immediately around the driven piles; however, the changes would be site specific and negligible. Surface Waters Construction activities, spills or leaks of Under Alternative Two, up to 0.3 Including pollutants during construction activities, spill hectare (0.8 acre) of wetlands would be Wetlands or leaks during transportation of materials or affected. Prior to construction, NASA from storage facilities, expected launch and MARS would complete additional emissions, and launch failures that may wetland delineations as needed, and result in release of liquid propellants would obtain a USACE jurisdictional all have the potential to affect surface waters determination and necessary permits. including wetlands. NASA and MARS NASA would implement mitigation would minimize adverse impacts to surface measures to ensure no net loss of waters by acquiring permits as necessary, wetlands. Impacts to surface waters and implementing site-specific best from construction would be the same management practices to reduce potential as Alternative One, although fewer impacts. Approximately 1.7 hectares (4.1 ELV launches under Alternative Two acres) of wetlands would be affected. Prior would create less potential for spills. to construction, NASA and MARS would 26-AUG-09\\ iii Executive Summary Resource Alternative