Trouble on the Water: What Regulations Made Relativity Put History on Hold Over a Boat?
John T. Gordon
Thousands watched on Saturday, March 11 as the rocket startup Relativity attempted a launch of the world’s first 3D printed rocket; the first step in the company’s broader mission to revolutionize space technology on earth and beyond. While the launch attempt faced a series of troubles that eventually led to its failure (the launch was later successfully conducted on Wednesday, March 22), one hang-up was not technical, but regulatory.
After a countdown lasting over an hour, at 1:48:35 of the launch broadcast (with just 1:09 left in the countdown), the procedure came to a screeching halt when someone in control came over the air: “HOLD HOLD HOLD . . . due to a fouled range.”
While there were a few minutes of confusion, the host of Relativity’s broadcast spoke up at 1:50:25 to clarify the issue. “I just got confirmation there is a boat in the range. We’re going to standby to see if they can clear the boat from our radius.” At 1:55:47, the launch countdown resumed (only to be later doomed by technical issues).
So, what is a “fouled range” and what made Relativity stop their launch? As it turns out, the answer to that question is a regulatory spiderweb involving the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”), the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Space Force.
Rockets aren’t planes. Why do launch companies need clearance from the FAA to launch, anyway?
Not dissimilar to how the government is currently debating which established regulatory body to cram cryptocurrency regulation into (the SEC versus the Commodities Future and Trading Commission, etc.), the simple answer is, the government doesn’t change as fast as tech, and they often must work with the regulatory bodies they have.
The power to regulate rocket launches originally had nothing to do with the FAA. At its inception, the power to govern space traffic was given directly to the Department of Transportation (“DOT”) by the creation of the Office of Commercial Space Transportation (“the Office”) under the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984. This made the Office “horizontally” aligned to the FAA, which was also directly under the DOT. However, in perhaps a sign of the stagnant and sometimes devolving state of space technology at the time, the Office was absorbed by the FAA in 1995 to make it an office within that agency; thus the FAA became the head regulatory body for launches.
Boats can sail under airplanes. Why does the FAA care so much about launches?
Most relevant to Relativity’s boat problem, the Office states that one of its main goals is to “protect the public health and safety [and] safety of property . . .” This poses a special concern for the FAA regarding the launch industry, as Boeing is not at the technological stage where it blows up several planes just to learn about them like the commercial space industry is wont to do. While these explosions are undoubtedly incredible and awesome to watch (not to mention necessary for launch companies to learn), federal regulators want to make sure that the collateral damage does not reach American citizens or their property.
What exactly does the FAA do about it?
To understand Relativity’s situation and how it was legally different than other launch companies, it is important to remember that they attempted to launch Terran 1 from Space Force’s Cape Canaveral base in Florida. Due to Relativity launching off a “federal launch range,” they are in a slightly different position than those launching from a private area.
Under 14 C.F.R. § 437.63, an FAA “permittee” (in this case, Relativity) must have an agreement in writing with a federal launch range operator if they are launching from a Federal launch range. Unless this agreement specifies otherwise, if the overflight occurs over navigable water, the permittee is also required to have a separate written agreement with the U.S. Coast guard to establish procedures for issuing a “Notice to Mariners” and clearing the area before a launch.
The operators of Cape Canaveral pay special attention in this regard because, as section 3.11.3 of an Environmental Assessment draft for the Terran 1 launch noted, “[a] significant amount of ocean-going transportation goes through Port Canaveral, including commercial shipping and cruise lines and commercial and private fishing and pleasure boats.”
For this reason, the U.S. Coast Guard, through the Department of Homeland Security, released a new rule in April of 2022 to “ensure the safety of vessels, mariners and navigable waters during scheduled rocket launch vehicle operations” from Cape Canaveral. This rule established a pre-determined “regular navigation area” (RNA) of 12 nautical miles for rocket launches from Cape Canaveral. When this RNA is activated, the Captain of the Port (a specific U.S. Coast guard Officer for the area, as defined in 33 C.F.R. § 6.01-3) has the legal authority to restrict all movement of vessels in the area just before and just after launch.
Conclusion
In Relativity’s case, it is doubtless that this exact RNA is what was in effect when the vessel came too close to the launch site. So, somewhere between the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, the FAA’s permittee requirements, the U.S. Space Force’s federal launch range agreement, and the U.S. Coast Guard’s RNA, some unknowing boater wandered into a restricted area and put history on hold with about 1 minute to go.