The response by the FAA Official just shows why they are not the folks to add any new authority to the scope of what authority they have responsibility for because They are bureaucrats
interested only in rules, fiefdoms and paperwork on top of endless cycles of the same. This is proven when (taken from article direct quote from the FASA official in charge of this system) Kelvin Coleman, testified that the FAA has taken several measures to streamline its process including creating advisory circulars, increasing staff levels and forming a committee to expedite license approvals.End Quotation.
Lets read this and examine his words a minute This Official thinks taking steps to make the process more streamlined is adding more (new, untrained or at best inexperienced) staff, so now it takes more effort to get the right person to file a permit or request properly because unless those new staff are going to grab a stack of applications for launch license 's and work in parallel with existing staffhaving the same authority as existing staff then there is no advantage to adding more staff all they will do is introduce more chance of a rejected application or acceptance of a application in error thus slowing the actual issuance of the launch license. Create advisory circulars - sounds like publication of some kind of notification , Advisory to who? A launch license has been requested , now some staff gets assignment to write this document ,document waits for aproval, rewrite resubmit for aproval, be printed or formatted for electronic distribution distributed to some other parties time allowed for this group or department to respond to the proposed advisory,etc… Read DELAY LOOP again a layer of endless paperwork and then wants to FORM a Committee to EXPEDITE the issuance of the requested license??? How does any of this expedite anything except growing older or death of a company while awaiting the golden licence??
First this shows the attitude and aproach taken by the FAA is faulty and fails to meet the requirements of the task which is to issue permission to launch a craft into space in a timely manner. so I propose the following, The FAA is responcible foronly atmospheric operated craft not attempting travel into spaceor any craft operating in space or transiting atmospheric air space. No extensive studys are to be required such as each launch needing a new enviromental impact study for launches occuring from previously used and studied sites, the original studies done for a site should cover future usebarring new factors worthy of a new study (new fuel, new species discovery, pollution of a environment from unexamined cause becoming known) and then only that aspect being reviewed not a full re-application for a new PERMIT thats lets Licence launch sites and facilities not each launch. Permit each launch with a simple check list , launching a previously tested and approved rocket type, using same booster,site previously used ,weather is approved if with in agreed required safe limits,permit for that launch Approved launch window is set and THEN FAA gets a 24hour notice that launch site X-1, canavral, the virginia launch range what ever will be ACTIVE on this date from window opening until closed please issue proper notice to all air traffic to avoid launch range and stay clear as range will be in use. FAA can handle all traffic rerouting needed to keep Atmospheric traffic clear and out of danger. Let the FAA take care of its duties to air traffic just as it does now, say when a MOA is in use that airs pace is closed period! Let the certification of rockets and spacecraft stay in th e hands of persons and departments all ready expert at this art. Simply achieve efficient and safe application for and issuance of permission to launch. The statements by the FAA official do not address or solve the problem in any sane persons way of thinking, the only way his statement makes any sense at all is that he sees a stack of backlogged applications for licence, in FAA speak a licence is a semi permanent thing like as in a pilots Licence, or a type certification of anew type or design of an aircraft long term endeavors at any level so routing it through advisory panels added staff , committee is an OK way to reduce the backlog because as long as itis not sitting in an in box , but some movement is happening the backlog is veiwed as under control. The delays and time required for these methods being used is an acceptable thing and is viewed by the group or person applying for certification or pilots credential is accepted as normal and a few weeks or months added to getting approval is not a huge deal because the time required to get those approvals is common to take years to acquire by custom. Lets not make a permit to launch a customarily long (years ) endeavor Keep the bureaucrats out of the loop advise, dont ask them for permission, tell them this is happening on this day at this time clear the area .