Running head: COLORADO PROPOSED SPACEPORT

Colorado Proposed Spaceport

Team 52

Juan Andrini, Ben Halle, Brian Sorrell, Melanie Stricklan, Patrick Villareal

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

SPSM 6000 Practical Research in Space Operations

Webster University

Study Director: Mr. William Hoffman

May 12, 2011

COLORADO SPACEPORT

2

RELEASE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

We, the undersigned, Webster University Graduate Student Team 52, Spring II Term,

2011, hereby release all intellectual property rights of our research and deliverables as submitted

in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Webster University SPSM6000 course. Webster

University, The Colorado Springs Regional Economic Development Corporation, The Office of

Commercial Space Transportation (FAA/AST), and the State of Colorado may reproduce,

modify, edit, distribute in printed or electronic version all, or portions, of this work for academic

or business development purposes without fee or encumbrances into perpetuity. We release all

claims to immediate and future rights of this material into perpetuity. We hereby testify by

witness thereof our signatures that this work is our original research and it contains only by

reference or citation, other works in printed or electronic form as accepted in academic research.

Witness William C Hoffman, Jr. Director - Space Programs Webster University hoffmanw@webster.edu

COLORADO SPACEPORT

3

COLORADO SPACEPORT

4

Table of Contents

Abstract ............................................................................................................................................6

Objectives ........................................................................................................................................7

Spaceport Designation .....................................................................................................................8

Space Commercialization ....................................................................................................8

Colorado .............................................................................................................................11

Designation Process ...........................................................................................................11

Future Efforts .....................................................................................................................12

Benefits of a Spaceport ..................................................................................................................13

Tourism ..............................................................................................................................13

Scientific Research.............................................................................................................16

Commercial Applications ..................................................................................................18

Economic and Job Stimulation ..........................................................................................22

Spaceport America .........................................................................................................................26

Why Bring a Spaceport to New Mexico? ..........................................................................28

The Initial Stages ...............................................................................................................30

Measurable Progress ..........................................................................................................31

Spaceport America Today..................................................................................................32

What’s Next for Spaceport America? ................................................................................34

Takeaways..........................................................................................................................35

Future Impact Studies ....................................................................................................................36

Economic Impact Study Considerations ............................................................................37

Environmental Impact Study Considerations ....................................................................47

COLORADO SPACEPORT

5

Support ...........................................................................................................................................54

Conclusion .....................................................................................................................................56

References ......................................................................................................................................58

Appendix ........................................................................................................................................63

COLORADO SPACEPORT

6

Division of Labor

Juan Andrini – Spaceport America

Ben Halle – Benefits, Abstract, Conclusion

Brian Sorrell – Spaceport Designation

Melanie Stricklan – Support, Governor/EDC Letters of Intent, Industry Networking

Patrick Villareal – Economic and Environmental Impacts

All – Compilation, Formatting, Editing

COLORADO SPACEPORT

7

Abstract

Colorado has one of the most robust and well-developed commercial space sectors of almost any

other state in the nation. As such, it is perfectly poised to take advantage of President Obama’s

National Space Policy that emphasizes the utilization and promotion of private space industries

in developing new technologies and accessing the vast reaches of space. However, despite its

strong industrial base, Colorado is falling far behind other states in the realm of actually applying

its inherent assets and native expertise in local space applications such as potential spaceports.

With seven existing spaceports, and eight others in different stages of proposal and research

across the nation, Colorado risks losing its industrial and innovative edge as future potential

business migrates to other states in support of their spaceports and inherent business

opportunities. In order to maintain its space superiority, Colorado should take the first step and

submit a letter from the Governor to the Associate Director for Commercial Space

Transportation declaring the state’s intent to be a “proposed” spaceport state. Doing so would

place Colorado on the FAA/AST spaceport map in their annual Commercial Space

Transportation Developments publication for all interested industries. Proposed spaceport status

will also open opportunities for federal funding for further feasibility studies and research. As a

spaceport state, Colorado could further enhance its potential to increase economic activity and to

create much needed jobs throughout the state. Obtaining proposed spaceport status is the first

step in qualifying for needed impact and feasibility studies. Likewise, it is the first step, based on

other spaceport states’ success, in garnering the crucial industry and commercial support that

would make the venture a success.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

8

Objectives

• To acquire Governor Hickenlooper’s signature on an official memo to the FAA

demonstrating Colorado’s intent to become a “proposed” spaceport state.

• To couple Colorado’s prominent commercial space industry with the current National

Space Policy’s strong emphasis on building and partnering with the private space

sector.

• To promote the future advancement of the spaceport concept and the utilization of

space capabilities already inherent within the state of Colorado.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

9

Spaceport Designation

Colorado must pursue designation as a spaceport state in order to enable exploitation of

available commercial space infrastructure and grant funding. This designation will allow the

conduct of necessary feasibility studies on the potential for Colorado to become a viable

spaceport and to promote the potential for placement of a National Aerospace Control Center

(NACC). It will also garner recognition of Colorado in the Federal Aviation Administration,

Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA/AST) annual Commercial Space

Transportation Development publication to get Colorado recognized internationally as a viable

commercial space transportation center. This will support Colorado’s extensive existing

commercial space infrastructure and allow the state to compete for future growth as the

Commercial Space industry expands and matures as a significant, global economic enterprise.

Space Commercialization

Commercial capabilities are making an ever increasing foray into the space industry. The

industry is in its infancy, but holds significant potential for the future of space. Baird asserts that

“the high cost of space is…one of the biggest obstacles…to the growth of space

commercialization” and that “the key to successful space exploration is free enterprise” (2008).

An increasing number of privately funded organizations are looking to space to exploit

opportunities in the areas of energy, transportation, media, manufacturing, tourism, and others.

The key to successful space exploration is free enterprise (Baird, 2008). The private sector is

working to build space infrastructure without dependence on NASA and the Department of

Defense.

“Space commerce is fundamentally dependent on space transportation -- the ability to

access, move through, and return from space” (DoC, 2011). The U.S. Space Transportation

COLORADO SPACEPORT

10

Policy of 2005 “emphasizes the government's need to assure U.S. access to space. It calls for a

fundamental transformation in U.S. space transportation capabilities and infrastructure and

encourages the government to capitalize on the entrepreneurial spirit of the U.S. private sector,

which offers new approaches and technology innovation in U.S. space transportation, options for

enhancing space exploration activities, and opportunities to open new commercial markets,

including public space travel” (DoC), 2011. The National Space Policy of 2010 charges the

government to “work jointly to acquire space launch services and hosted payload arrangements

that are reliable, responsive to U.S. Government needs, and cost-effective; enhance operational

efficiency, increase capacity, and reduce launch costs by investing in the modernization of space

launch infrastructure; and develop launch systems and technologies necessary to assure and

sustain future reliable and efficient access to space, in cooperation with U.S. industry, when

sufficient U.S. commercial capabilities and services do not exist” (NSP, 2010).

This shift in the government viewpoint of commercial launch has driven an explosion of

commercial space launch ventures in recent years. Commercial space launches hold a market in

excess of $100 billion annually (ULA, 2011). The United Launch Alliance is a Lockheed Martin

and Boeing joint venture providing commercial launch services to the U.S. government.

Arianespace is a European consortium providing a variety of launch services. Space X, an

emerging company with aims toward decreasing launch cost and increasing reliability, had

demonstrated significant early success. Bigelow Aerospace has aims to provide transport

services to the International Space Station. Virgin Galactic is making a foray into the industry,

beginning with SpaceShip One’s award of the $10 million Ansari X PRIZE. NASA is driving

many of the commercial efforts through its Commercial Orbital Transportation Services effort.

This program finances private sector space transport system development.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

11

With ever-increasing commercial space activities comes the inevitable, but necessary

government management, oversight, and regulation. The Office of Space Commercialization,

under the Department of Commerce, is the primary government authority for space commerce

policy activities. Its mission is to “foster the conditions for the economic growth and

technological advancement of the U.S. commercial space industry”, with a vision of “a robust

and responsive U.S. industry that is the world leader in space commerce (OSC, 2011). This

office manages all sectors of the space commerce industry, to including satellite navigation,

remote sensing, and space transportation. This office also participates in broad governmental

discussions of national space policy and other space-related issues.

The Office of Commercial Space Transportation, under the Federal Aviation

Administration, “regulates the commercial space transportation industry, to ensure compliance

with international obligations of the United States and to protect the public health and safety,

safety of property, and national security and foreign policy interests of the United States;

encourages, facilitates, and promotes commercial space launches and reentries by the private

sector; recommends appropriate changes in Federal statutes, treaties, regulations, policies, plans,

and procedures; and facilitates the strengthening and expansion of the United States space

transportation infrastructure” (FAA, 2011). In addition, the office issues licenses for commercial

domestic launches and domestic spaceport facilities.

While many commercial launch systems use government launch complexes, there is an

increasing effort to develop private complexes. In addition to wholly commercial capabilities,

many governments are providing launch access and support to commercial payloads. This is

effectively civilianizing the government launch capability. There are currently eight Federal

Aviation Administration licensed commercial spaceports within the United States. They are

COLORADO SPACEPORT

12

located in California, Alaska, Florida, Virginia, Texas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. Six

additional states, Wyoming, Alabama, Hawaii, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Washington have

proposals that are in varying stages of completion (FAA, 2011).

Colorado

The state of Colorado is uniquely positioned to exploit this surge of commercial space

industry. The state is already a national leader in aerospace, specifically in space applications.

The state has the third largest space related economy, and ranks first in concentration of

aerospace employees (Development Research Partners, 2010). Eight of the nation’s largest

space-related contractors maintain a significant footprint in Colorado. In total, there are over 400

companies providing products and services. These companies employ over 163,000 personnel

with a $2.8 billion annual payroll (Colorado Space Coalition, 2011). Colorado also ranks second

in the nation for awarded Small Business Innovation Research Grants. The state has the second

most educated workforce in the nation, and multiple universities offer graduate programs in

space sciences. Finally, Colorado has an unequaled military presence with four commands in the

state. These are Air Force Space Command, Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army

Forces Strategic Command, North American Aerospace Defense Command, and U.S. Northern

Command. There are also three military bases exclusively conducting space activities; Buckley

Air Force Base, Peterson Air Force Base, and Schriever Air Force Base. The next logical and

obvious step is for Colorado to be formally recognized as a proposed spaceport state.

Designation Process

The first part of the process is a letter from the Governor to the FAA/AST proclaiming

the interest and intent of Colorado in becoming a proposed spaceport state. Upon review, the

FAA will then include Colorado in the Commercial Space Transportation and Developments

COLORADO SPACEPORT

13

publications as a proposed spaceport state. It really is that simple. Unlike certification or

licensing, designation does not imply or commit the state to additional requirements. There is no

additional cost or taxpayer burden associated with the designation. It does not indicate or imply

that Colorado will necessarily pursue an in-state launch capability. What it does is gain national

recognition for the state. It allows others internationally direct insight into the wide array of

space capabilities that Colorado has to offer.

Funding is available; there are numerous grant and contracts that the designation will

open the way to. For example, the FAA instituted the Commercial Space Transportation

Infrastructure Matching Grant Program. This program in its’ first year awarded $500,000 to

multiple states; $227,000 to Alaska for a rocket motor storage facility, $104,000 to Florida to

develop a Spaceport Master Plan, and many others (FAA, 2011). It is possible that without this

designation, Colorado could continue to lose space contracts to other states, as evidenced by the

Atlas and Delta launch vehicle work that has been lost. There are no negative implications to

pursuing the spaceport state designation, but many potentially positive outcomes.

Future Efforts

Garnering a proposed spaceport designation opens the door for Colorado to pursue a

myriad of opportunities. For example, there has been extensive research in to the development of

a National Aerospace Control Center (NACC), essentially 21st Century air traffic control for

space, located in Colorado. The state could pursue funding for a feasibility study to further this

effort. A designation also opens the door for grant funding to perform a feasibility study for an

actual spaceport. Colorado could partner with existing launch services in other states for point-

to-point launch and landing, or many other viable non-launch activities.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

14

In the near-term, it is recommended that future graduate students begin development of

Colorado’s portion of the FAA/AST Commercial Space Transportation and Developments

report. Once the designation is official, it is anticipated that the state’s aerospace industry will be

much more engaged and willing to support efforts in this direction.

Benefits of a Spaceport

There are many potential benefits to having an active spaceport in the state of Colorado.

First, a spaceport can serve as an outstanding tourist attraction that could bring thousands of new

visitors into the state. Second, it can serve as a conduit and as base of operations for new and

ongoing space-based, scientific research. Third, along with current space policy, it will boost

commercial markets and industries within the state. Finally, it will generate millions of dollars in

economic revenues, it will create the demand for thousands of new jobs, and it will increase

much needed tax revenues. In this manner a spaceport in Colorado will be of benefit both to the

state and to its citizens.

Tourism

One of the many economic advantages to developing a spaceport system is the increased

draw of space tourism to the state. A spaceport will serves as an additional attraction to a state

that already has so many natural advantages as demonstrated in its glorious weather, beautiful

mountains, unmatched skiing, and limitless outdoor adventure capability. Having an active

spaceport will only further solidify the charm and appeal that Colorado has to people all over the

world.

The appeal of having an active spaceport is recognized by some of the leading tourist

areas in the world. For this reason, even Hawaii, where tourism impacts all sectors of its

economy and is the primary source of employment and revenue within the state, has taken steps

COLORADO SPACEPORT

15

to capitalize on the draw and attraction of space (Messier, 2011). In July 2009, Hawaii passed a

bill to become designated as a possible spaceport state, and to begin conducting environmental

and community impact studies (Tuohy, 2009). Today, Hawaii’s State Senators are currently

debating a bill that would enable their state to apply for an active spaceport license from the

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (Messier, 2011). Their legislature recognizes that “new

developments in technology, increased visitor sophistication, and greater competition from other

world tourism markets require Hawaii’s tourism industry to direct their marketing efforts at

visitors with specific interests” (Messier, 2011, p. 1). One such interest that they are working to

expand as a niche product in hopes of enhancing Hawaii’s appeal as a tourist destination is that

of space tourism (Messier, 2011).

Space tourism is beginning to demonstrate an ever-increasingly lucrative business

potential. For example, Virgin Galactic has already signed a 20-year lease with Spaceport

America in New Mexico “that calls for $1 million payments a year to the spaceport for five years

and then more money to cover costs, [and] has deposits from more than 300 people signed up for

$200,000 each” (Schrader, 2010, p. 3). They plan to take around six passengers at a time up to

50,000 feet, release their spacecraft, and then blast them into suborbital space at speeds greater

than 2,500 mph, where they will experience zero-gravity and fantastic views of space before they

glide back through the atmosphere and down to earth (Virgin Galactic, n.d.). To expand and

prolong this experience, a spaceport in Colorado could serve as an alternative destination for

future Virgin Galactic flights.

Furthermore, Virgin Galactic is not the only company to pursue this dream of space

tourism. Other groundbreaking companies are also engaging in similar endeavors. For example,

Rocketplane Global lobbied Hawaii for suborbital space flights between Honolulu and Kona

COLORADO SPACEPORT

16

International Airport (potential sites for their proposed spaceport), and the Rocket Racing

League, which proposes to host NASCAR-style racing within the earth’s atmosphere, has tested

flights out of the Oklahoma Spaceport (Hsu, 2009). The Oklahoma Spaceport is an FAA’s

licensed Space Launch Operators with one of North America’s longest runways, coming in at

over 13,500 feet (FAA, 2011).

As with any tourist attraction, the lure that a spaceport in Colorado will have to people

from around the world will also generate residual business with related, support industries. These

industries can build off the interest generated by the spaceport in Colorado, and target that

potential market audience with interrelated thematic attractions. For example, as previous

researchers from Webster University have pointed out, theme hotels, such as one built around a

life-size replica of Star Trek’s Starship Enterprise could also attract thousands of tourists to the

state (Ward, et al., 2007). Subsequently, if they were to position their hotel next to, or at, the

proposed spaceport site the tourism appeal would only be stronger. Likewise, theme-related

amusement parks, and activities could also capitalize on the location and interests of those

coming to utilize the spaceport facilities and take advantage of both the time and the

entertainment opportunities not provided by the spaceport itself.

As technology continues to improve, a spaceport in Colorado would not be limited to

short, suborbital flights into space, or its visitors to the possible earth-bound lodging and

attractions. Another upcoming possibility for future spaceports is to serve as a possible conduit

to prospective private and commercial space stations such as those proposed by Bigelow

Aerospace, LLC. Bigelow Aerospace is currently developing inflatable space modules or stations

that will be able to sustain human life for periods of time on low earth orbit. They are currently

planning to launch the first fully operational modules as early as 2014 (Chang, 2010). Over the

COLORADO SPACEPORT

17

past year or so, Bigelow Aerospace has been visiting countries around the world to gauge interest

and to garner support (Chang, 2010). “On October 22, [2010] Bigelow Aerospace signed

agreements with national space agencies, companies, and governmental entities in the

Netherlands, Sweden, Singapore, Japan, the United Kingdom, and New South Wales, Australia”

(FAA, 2011). These countries, as well as private or commercial entities, will be able to lease

these on-orbit modules, including transportation, at the current price of $25 million dollars per

person for a 30-day stay (Chang, 2010). Thus, as new orbital spacecraft and technology continue

to emerge, commercial spaceports, such as the one proposed for Colorado, could be become an

increasingly important cog in the space tourism industry.

Scientific Research

Aside from tourism, another benefit that can be of vital importance in having a spaceport

is the vast opportunities it provides for advanced scientific research. According to the New

Mexico Commercial Spaceport Economic Impact Study conducted by the Futron Corporation in

2005 for Spaceport America, “space tourism is not the only market for commercial suborbital

spaceflight: other potential markets include microgravity research, remote sensing, spaceflight

hardware qualification, and other scientific research” (Futron, 2005).

Microgravity and suborbital research is often done today using sounding rockets. These

sounding rockets carry scientific instruments into space along parabolic trajectories that seem to

pause for anywhere from 5-20 minutes near their apogee location (NASA, n.d.). This duration of

time, though short, along with the slow velocities of the rockets at their apogee are often ideal to

conduct specific scientific experiments. The sounding rocket program serves as a low-cost,

quick-turnaround testing platform for new scientific techniques, scientific instrumentation, and

spacecraft technology that has later been used on many actual space missions (NASA, n.d.).

COLORADO SPACEPORT

18

However, the use of sounding rockets requires vertical launch capability. As a proposed

spaceport in Colorado will not have vertical launch capabilities, an alternative method that a

spaceport in Colorado can utilize in order to accommodate suborbital, scientific research is

through horizontal launch. By serving as a potential horizontal launch and landing facility for

reusable launch vehicles (RLV), such at those designed and used by Virgin Galactic, a spaceport

in Colorado could provide an ideal staging area for new suborbital research.

Using horizontally launched RLVs can provide access to space similar to that provided

by sounding rockets, with potentially lower costs and perhaps on a more frequent basis (Foust,

2010). Another prospective benefit is the large quantity of human passengers and potential

researchers on these flights that can conduct human-based experiments and serve as possible test

subjects. This will give scientists the ability “to study the effects of weightlessness over a much

larger and more diverse population than is possible today on the ISS or shuttle missions” (Foust,

2010, p. 2). Evidence suggests that many tourists would also be willing to participate in passive

monitoring and possibly even more extensive testing (Foust, 2010). Beyond human-based

testing, and even for experiments that cannot be conducted on suborbital flights, RLVs can also

serve as an effective platform for testing equipment intended for future use in other space

applications such as on the International Space Station (Foust, 2010).

Many different research institutions, including one specific company with local facilities

in Boulder, Colorado, have recognized this forthcoming platform for scientific research. The

Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) has a Space Science and Engineering Division with a

Planetary Science Directorate located in Boulder, Colorado. On February 28, 2011, SwRI signed

a contract with Virgin Galactic “to send three scientists as payload specialists aboard eight

suborbital flights — some to altitudes greater than 350,000 feet, above the internationally

COLORADO SPACEPORT

19

recognized boundary of space” (Southwest Research Institute, 2011). As part of this contract

with Virgin Galactic, SwRI made full deposits for researchers to fly on their spacecraft, with the

possible arrangements for additional seats, for a total value of $1.6 million (Attenborough,

2011). Not only does SwRI plan to send its own researchers into space with scientific

experiments developed by their own in-house technical staff, but they also hope to assist other

American researchers “who do not have direct spaceflight experience to develop and fly their

payloads and personnel on suborbital missions” (Attenborough, 2011, p. 1).

In additional to signing contracts with Virgin Galactic, SwRI also plans to send

researchers up on XCOR Corporation’s high-altitude rocket plane, Lynx I, which anticipates

being able to send a researcher up to 200,000 feet (Southwest Research Institute, 2011). With

both Virgin Galactic and with XCOR, SwRI payload specialists will conduct their experiments,

either inside a pressurized cabin environment or externally, to test and collect data on biomedical

results, microgravity, and astronomical imaging (Southwest Research Institute, 2011). As these

tests are successful, and as more research institutes take advantage of the lower cost, higher

frequency, and increased availability of space flights, spaceports will become instrumental in

facilitating scientific research in space.

Commercial Applications

Another one of the great benefits of becoming a proposed spaceport state is the very

commercial nature of the spaceport itself. While it only takes the Governor’s signature to

designate the state of Colorado as a proposed spaceport state, much of the spaceport and its users

are from the commercial rather than the government sector. The tourism draw is from

commercial spaceflights, commercial hotels, restaurants, museums and other commercial

COLORADO SPACEPORT

20

attractions. Likewise, commercial industries and researchers conduct much of the proposed

research originating from spaceport-based flights and future products.

This commercial aspect of spaceports falls right in line with present space strategy

establish by the current Obama administration. One of the primary components of the National

Space Policy of the United States of America, published on June 28, 2010, emphasizes the need

and the importance of commercial space. In fact the second guiding principle in the policy states

that “a robust and competitive commercial space sector is vital to continued progress in space”

(National Space Policy, 2010, p. 3). It then goes on to explain how the United States is

committed to support and advance the commercial space sector and to make it competitive and

viable within both the local and global markets for “satellite manufacturing, satellite-based

services, space launch, terrestrial applications, and increased entrepreneurship” (National Space

Policy, 2010, p. 4).

The National Space Policy divides space activities into three sectors: commercial, civil,

and national security, with guidelines for each sector. The guidelines pertaining to the

commercial space sector that government departments and agencies must follow to promote a

healthy commercial space industry are as follows:

• Purchase and use commercial space capabilities and services to the maximum

practical extent when such capabilities and services are available in the marketplace

and meet United States Government requirements;

• Modify commercial space capabilities and services to meet government requirements

when existing commercial capabilities and services do not fully meet these

requirements and the potential modification represents a more cost-effective and

timely acquisition approach for the government;

COLORADO SPACEPORT

21

• Actively explore the use of inventive, nontraditional arrangements for acquiring

commercial space goods and services to meet United States Government

requirements, including measures such as public-private partnerships, hosting

government capabilities on commercial spacecraft, and purchasing scientific or

operational data products from commercial satellite operators in support of

government missions;

• Develop governmental space systems only when it is in the national interest and there

is no suitable, cost-effective U.S. commercial or, as appropriate, foreign commercial

service or system that is or will be available;

• Refrain from conducting United States Government space activities that preclude,

discourage, or compete with U.S. commercial space activities, unless required by

national security or public safety;

• Pursue potential opportunities for transferring routine, operational space functions to

the commercial space sector where beneficial and cost-effective, except where the

government has legal, security, or safety needs that would preclude

commercialization;

• Cultivate increased technological innovation and entrepreneurship in the commercial

space sector through the use of incentives such as prizes and competitions;

• Ensure that United States Government space technology and infrastructure are made

available for commercial use on a reimbursable, noninterference, and equitable basis

to the maximum practical extent;

COLORADO SPACEPORT

22

• Minimize, as much as possible, the regulatory burden for commercial space activities

and ensure that the regulatory environment for licensing space activities is timely and

responsive;

• Foster fair and open global trade and commerce through the promotion of suitable

standards and regulations that have been developed with input from U.S. industry;

• Encourage the purchase and use of U.S. commercial space services and capabilities in

international cooperative arrangements; and

• Actively promote the export of U.S. commercially developed and available space

goods and services, including those developed by small- and medium-sized

enterprises, for use in foreign markets, consistent with U.S. technology transfer and

nonproliferation objectives (National Space Policy, 2010, p. 10-11).

With this increased emphasis and underlying support for commercial space within the

United States, now is the perfect time for entering into ventures such as commercial spaceports.

Indeed, Colorado is already perfectly poised to take advantage of this recently emphasized

commercial space sector. In accordance with this policy, NASA recently signed a Space Act

Agreement with the State of Colorado to promote the commercialization of technology designed

for use in space (NASA, 2010). This agreement, signed on 13 December 2010, between NASA

and the Colorado Association for Manufacturing and Technology (CAMT), called the

Technology Acceleration Program and Regional Innovation Cluster for Aerospace and Clean

Energy, focuses on establishing a manufacturing park to boost rapid product development as well

as to cultivate space-related businesses in Colorado (NASA, 2010). By tapping into the strong

aerospace and energy industry base that is already prevalent in Colorado, this program will allow

companies within the manufacturing park to work directly with NASA to bring new products to

COLORADO SPACEPORT

23

market in record times. They hope to cut product development from an average of five years to

about 18 months (NASA, 2010).

Early in April 2011, CAMT identified the Agilent campus in Loveland, Colorado

(formerly the home of Hewlett Packard Co.) as the primary location for the Aerospace and Clean

Energy (ACE) project (Pankratz, 2011). This campus covers over 300 acres and contains over

800,000 square feet of building space (Pankratz, 2011). Loveland’s Chamber of Commerce

estimates that this new space-manufacturing park could possibly create between 7,000 – 10,000

new jobs across the state, attracting around 100 high tech and clean energy companies into the

park, and generating up to $7 billion net economic output annually (ACE-Loveland, n.d.).

With the new ACE project coming to Colorado, a spaceport would be a perfect

complimentary fit. Indeed, a spaceport would be an ideal testing ground for much of the new

technologies developed by the space-manufacturing park. Likewise, many of the same type

commercial industries attracted by the ACE project would also have like interests in a possible

cooperative spaceport research park. And while Loveland might be the selected location for the

manufacturing park, a spaceport and research park might be better located near the existing

Denver International or Colorado Springs Airport business parks. In this manner, a commercial

spaceport could also attract many additional businesses to the state of Colorado where access to

commercial transportation or future commercial space transportation will be essential.

Economic and Job Stimulation

As new businesses begin to migrate to Colorado to participate in the space-manufacturing

park, similar businesses will also come to support a new spaceport. These new businesses will

have the potential to create much-needed jobs and economic stimulation within the state. This

COLORADO SPACEPORT

24

can be accomplished on several levels that include new construction, daily operations, support

industries, and increased tax revenues to the state.

First, there will be a large demand for initial construction as businesses begin to build

new offices, warehouses, manufacturing facilities, and finally the actual construction of the

spaceport itself. This is extremely beneficial, especially during a time of economic turmoil when

the construction industry has been hurt due to the downturn of the housing industry and its

subsequent decrease in the demand for new construction. Much of the stress currently felt by our

local construction industry could be alleviated by the combined arrival of both the new space-

manufacturing or research park and a new spaceport within the state. As businesses relocate, they

will need new office space as well as closer warehouses and manufacturing facilities. Even in the

case of the manufacturing park, where current facilities already exist in the form of the Agilent

campus, extensive remodeling will still need to be done to accommodate the exact needs of the

individual businesses moving into the park. All of this will bring added jobs, and will be a

welcome boon, to the local, beleaguered construction companies.

An even greater project may be the actual construction of the spaceport itself. Depending

on where it is built, existing runways at the Denver International Airport and even at the

Colorado Springs Airport (previously certified as a Shuttle emergency landing site) could

potentially be utilized for horizontal launch and landing capabilities. However, if the spaceport is

constructed at a location where use of these runways is impractical, then new runways, and

launch facilities would have to be built. Once again, this would provide a large amount of

business to the construction industry. Even without new runways, a central location would need

to be chosen and facilities built to house the actual spaceport headquarters and command facility.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

25

The construction of a new spaceport, while not a permanent source of economic activity

and job creation itself, does provide the most immediate and visible economic boost. The Futron

Corporation, which conducted the economic impact study for Spaceport America, estimated that

the construction of the spaceport in New Mexico would generate a maximum $331 million in

total revenues and economic activity, as well as nearly 2,500 new jobs, during just one year of its

three-year estimated construction period (Futron, 2005). Granted, once the construction project is

complete, this level of economic activity and immediate job creation would go away, or at least

dwindle significantly, but it would still provide a huge boost to the economy that would then

continue at varying levels for support operations.

Once the construction of the spaceport is complete, it could then begin normal operations

and likewise begin to generate sustainable economic activities and permanent jobs within the

state. Colorado should conduct feasibility studies (using FAA grant funds) for determining if

future horizontal launch operations and activities to include suborbital tourism flights of multiple

operators, transportation of orbital cargo, standard crew and commercial passenger operations,

and other typical spaceport facility activities make sense for Colorado. A spaceport such as

Spaceport America could realize $460 million of new economic activity and 3,460 jobs within

the first five years of operation with possible increases to about $552 million of new economic

activity and 4,320 jobs within 10 years of operation (Futron, 2005).

One of the great advantages that Colorado has over other states vying for spaceport

capability is the broad base that already exists within the state for the manufacture of space

products and for space command-and-control assets. With the headquarters of the United States

Air Force Space Command and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD)

already here and operational in Colorado, there are already established and functioning assets

COLORADO SPACEPORT

26

that could be utilized to provide command and control, as well as space tracking and warning

capabilities, not only for a new spaceport in Colorado, but also for other spaceports in different

states around the nation. By building a proposed spaceport in Colorado, the state could tie into

these capabilities for its own use, and then it could also position itself to provide these same

capabilities, for a charged fee, to other states.

Beyond the increase in revenue and jobs produced by daily operations of the spaceport,

there would also be many ripple effects in both the economy and the job market for support

industries. For example new food and lodging facilities would be in demand by the construction

worker who are working on the spaceport, as well as by the incoming space tourist. The

slumping new-housing market would thrive as employees coming to work at the spaceport begin

to search for new living quarters. Likewise, retail and entertainment industries would also appear

to meet the subsequent demand. The communications industry would be required to support both

spaceport operations as well as the needs of personnel and families. All of these support

industries, required to sustain a spaceport and its surrounding community, would also create new

jobs and revenues. In so doing, the ripple effect would continue to compound and grow. For this

reason, analyst in New Mexico estimated that Spaceport America would have the “potential to

attract an additional 1,000 to 1,500 jobs in space vehicle and aircraft manufacturing,

headquarters operations and support services activities and in excess of $200 million in related

economic activity by 2020” (Futron, 2005, p. 14).

Finally, besides generating potentially large amounts of economic activity and revenue

within the state for both businesses and citizens alike, having a successful spaceport in Colorado

would also generate increased tax revenues for the state. As new businesses flourish, so will the

state. As thousands of new jobs are created, the unemployment rate within the state also has the

COLORADO SPACEPORT

27

potential to decrease. Currently unemployed people within the state will have increased

opportunities to fill the demand for labor and expertise on all levels. With increased tax

revenues, and a decreased rate of unemployment draining an already strained system, Colorado

would be in a much better fiscal situation. Even if Colorado offers attractive tax benefits to

companies willing to relocate and support the space industry segment within the state, it will still

collect additional revenues from sources not currently available. By using creative tax incentives

that can be phased out gradually over the initial investment period, Colorado could generate

substantial new opportunities for revenue growth.

Thus a proposed spaceport has the potential to very beneficial for the state of Colorado. It

will generate millions of dollars in economic revenues as well as create the demand for

thousands of new jobs. This will first manifest itself in new construction followed by the daily

operation of the spaceport itself. The operation of a proposed spaceport will attract a whole new

segment of the tourism market to Colorado. New areas of research, and research-based

companies, will be able to use the spaceport as a new conduit for access to space and its unique

environment. The new national emphasis on the commercial space sector, along with the newly

planned space-manufacturing park between Colorado and NASA, will increase the ability of

local commercial businesses to take advantage of new space technologies and production to

support emerging space activities as well as a potential spaceport. The jobs and revenues created

by spaceport operations will then produce a ripple effect of demand for products and services

from additional support industries and personnel. Finally, the increase in jobs and revenue

production will result in decreased unemployment and increased tax revenues for the state of

Colorado. In this manner, a successful spaceport can be of great benefit to all involved.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

28

Spaceport America

New Mexico has had a significant role in the booming space industry since the 1930s

when Robert Goddard began conducting research there (Spaceport America, 2011). Soon after

that, Wernher Von Braun had used the New Mexico landscape to conduct space research and

experiments and was later followed by several space industry giants such as NASA (Spaceport

America, 2011). All of these parties shared one common interest—they were all pioneers in the

initial origins of aerospace industry development. New Mexico proved to be a sufficient test bed

for aerospace development because of the mild weather conditions, and the copious amounts of

open land and airspace.

During the 1990s, there was strong interest in the aerospace community to research and

pursue the commercialization of space and the concept of reusable launch vehicles. It was during

this time that a coalition of interested individuals based out of New Mexico formed with the

intention of bringing the space commercialization concept to the State (Spaceport America,

2011). This group was known as the Southwest Space Taskforce. This group conducted much

research on the best location for a spaceport within the State of New Mexico. They decided to

pursue a 27 square mile piece of land, located 45 miles north of Las Cruces, New Mexico

(Spaceport America, 2011). Las Cruse is located by the southern state line, separating New

Mexico from Texas.

Knowing that Taskforce was limited to what it was able to influence, they sought out an

ally to for political backing. In 2003, Rick Homans, the Secretary for the New Mexico Economic

Development Cabinet, joined forces with the Southwest Space Taskforce and approached New

Mexico Governor Bill Richardson with the New Mexico Spaceport idea (Heild, 2011). With

Richardson backing them up, they were successful in bringing the X-Prize Cup to New Mexico,

COLORADO SPACEPORT

29

and eventually formed a partnership with one of the world’s largest commercial spaceflight

contributors--Virgin Galactic (Gomez, Gutman, Lee, & McCune, 2007).

Looking at the history of Spaceport America, one could assume that this was a relatively

easy process. A determined group had a vision, did some research, acquired political support,

and successfully accomplished what they had set out to do. In reality this was no easy task. There

are many moving parts that are involved with the establishment of a spaceport in any one of the

United States. Many legal, political, economical, safety, and physical obstacles must be

overcome in order to have a shot at building a spaceport. The journey to Spaceport America in

New Mexico was a long and hard road, paved with uncertainty, and accomplished through a

blend of hard work, persistence, a solid vision, and even a little bit of luck.

Why bring a spaceport to New Mexico?

To build a facility aimed solely at accommodating commercial space travel--a concept

still in development--is no easy task. A project of this magnitude would need the support of local

government, FAA licensing and designation, the support and acceptance of the local citizens, and

most importantly; lots of money. There is a comprehensive, painstaking, and expensive process

involved with the planning, development, and execution of a spaceport project. Taxpayers and

private corporations alike would have to produce millions of dollars in revenue to in order to

build the facility. In order to understand why a State would go through with the rigors of this

process, one would have to first understand the benefits of bringing a spaceport to their

hometown

New Mexico has a long history of involvement in American Aerospace major milestones.

With wide-open land and airspace, great weather, and support from the local citizens, New

Mexico was a perfect place to conduct much of the Country’s initial missile and rocket testing.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

30

With much of the State’s space industry diminishing and relocating, political leaders were faced

with the challenge of figuring out how to bring back the local space interest. With an increasing

nationwide interest in the commercial space travel concept, New Mexico leaders decided that

building the Nation’s first commercial spaceport would be instrumental in bringing back

aerospace industry to the State. Although commercial space travel has not yet begun at Spaceport

America, the local government has partnered up with several aerospace businesses and has also

made and alliance with commercial space giant “Virgin Galactic;” promising to surely make a

comeback in the space industry.

Space tourism has seriously diminished since the days of rocket testing and space

research. Tourism to Roswell, New Mexico for Alien enthusiasts hasn’t even been the same in

recent years. New Mexico Legislators hope that the newly constructed spaceport will help to

bring space tourism back in a major way. Several strategies for improving tourism are already

taking place at the spaceport. For nominal fees, tourists can participate in guided hardhat tours of

the facilities. For those interested in group tours, the spaceport also offers guided bus group tours

as well (Spaceport America, 2011). Other plans involve highlighting additional area space

attractions within the state. Of course the main means for bringing tourism and interested parties

to the location is the future availability of actual flights in commercial spacecraft. Although it

may be a rather expensive tour, commercial spaceflights will take New Mexico space tourism to

level never seen before. Surely this will be another major milestone in New Mexico’s aerospace

history.

One of the biggest reasons behind New Mexico's grand push for Spaceport America is

simply local economic stimulation. According to current New Mexico Governor, Susanna

Martinez, ''The Spaceport is part of the plan for economic development in New Mexico, and the

COLORADO SPACEPORT

31

voters made it clear they support it (Frosch, 2011).” It was strongly believed that the spaceport

would bring in thousands of jobs while constantly bringing in a steady stream of wealthy tourist

from all over the world. Bringing these tourists in will also hopefully bring much desired

attention to the many other attractions that are located throughout the state of New Mexico,

therefore increasing the local economic revenue. When the project was approved back in 2006,

then Governor Bill Richardson approved the project with a budget of 132 million (Stolley, 2009).

This money came from recent gas and oil revenue. The project was finally budgeted for 209

million, but since has incurred more than 400 million in costs (Stolley, 2009). Unexpected costs

have put the State of New Mexico in a significant deficit, and now more than ever, it is important

to for this project to succeed and bring the cash flow of tourism into the local economy.

The Initial Stages

The grand plan to build a spaceport in New Mexico began with an assessment of New

Mexico’s vast history. The habitation of New Mexico goes back tens of thousands of years. This

fact made it very difficult for researchers to isolate an optimal location for the proposed

spaceport. The selected location was right in the center of a historical trade route called the

Camino Real (Frosch, 2011). Before the groundbreaking could begin, the Federal government

required that the land be surveyed by archaeologists in order to ensure that there were no

historical artifacts of importance located at the construction site. Archaeologists found only

sporadic samples of ancient Indian arrowheads, therefore construction was approved (Frosch,

2011).

The origins of the New Mexico spaceport date back to the early 1990s. The initial

concept was to provide an area for the recovery of reentry capsules from orbit (Gomez, Gutman,

Lee, & McCune, 2007). During this time, $1.4 million in seed money was raised through

COLORADO SPACEPORT

32

multiple studies conducted by NASA. The studies included safety, environmental, and feasibility

for using the proposed area as a landing site for unmanned capsules. It was during this time that

the first strategic and marketing plan for New Mexico spaceport was developed (Gomez,

Gutman, Lee, & McCune, 2007). Interest in this program was backed and supported by the New

Mexico State University. Reentry capsules was the initial market for the New Mexico spaceport

during the early 1990s.The biggest obstacle with this concept was a small market size. A land

recovery site for unmanned capsules would bring in little revenue as well as minimal economic

job growth.

During the mid to late 1990s, interests shifted from reentry capsules to a launch-to-orbit

concept (Gomez, Gutman, Lee, & McCune, 2007). This marked the formation of the Southwest

Regional Spaceport Taskforce. Additional fund raising from the Air Force led to the creation of

the New Mexico Office for Space Commercialization (NMOSC). This office was tasked with

pursuing an entrepreneurial space programs (Gomez, Gutman, Lee, & McCune, 2007). Site

selection analysis and studies continued, while environmental impact and safety guidelines were

examined and developed. Studies conducted include; technical feasibility and strategic

development plans, Air Force grants, environmental impact statements, site licensing, NASA-

sponsored business plan grant, and the governor’s technical excellence committee report

(Gomez, Gutman, Lee, & McCune, 2007).

Measurable Progress

There were several major milestones that took place throughout the spaceport planning

process of New Mexico. In 2003, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson officially backed the

plan to build a spaceport in New Mexico (Heild, 2011). This idea was presented to him by his

Head of State Tax and Revenue Department, Rick Homans (Heild, 2011). The Governor, excited

COLORADO SPACEPORT

33

about the idea, appointed a committee dedicated to accomplishing the plan, and appointed

Homans as the Chairman of the New Mexico Spaceport Authority (Gallegos, 2010). Homans

went on to wear many hats within the local government to include The Secretary of Economic

Development (Gallegos, 2010). In 2010, Homans was named Executive Director of the

Spaceport Authority. With Homans heading the Board, many milestones were tackled to include;

project planning and management, process bidding, land negotiations, and the development of

necessary infrastructure (Heild, 2011). All of these requirements were very instrumental in the

success of the project.

An essential part of New Mexico’s quest for Spaceport accomplishment was to create

buzz for the project, internationally. One way to accomplish this was for New Mexico to bring

the Ansari X-Prize Cup home to the Spaceport. The X-Prize Cup was designed to be an annual

event, hosted in southern New Mexico, geared at bringing in private parties and industry leaders

interested in showcasing their current commercial spaceflight aircrafts (Vane, 2005). Prizes are

given to contestants based on several different categories. This concept helped to bring a lot of

notoriety to the New Mexico space industry—much needed notoriety used to back the legitimacy

of having a spaceport aimed at commercial space travel.

One of the biggest milestones of the New Mexico Spaceport project was the alliance

between New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and Millionaire founder of Virgin Galactic, Sir

Richard Branson (Spaceport America, 2011). In December, 2005, Virgin Galactic accepted the

Governor’s proposal to make the New Mexico Spaceport, Virgin Galactic’s World Headquarters

(Gomez, Gutman, Lee, & McCune, 2007). Not only did this action stir up a lot of media interest,

but it also guaranteed New Mexico the ability to conduct commercial flight operations out of the

newly constructed spaceport. Signing a multimillion dollar contract with the world’s largest

COLORADO SPACEPORT

34

commercial aerospace company definitely helped New Mexico legitimize the arduous,

painstaking process that has put the State on the map as a Spaceport Designated State.

Spaceport America Today

Today, New Mexico is one of only a few States that hosts a spaceport geared at

commercial aerospace operations. State appropriations and tax revenue have gone into funding

the tremendous construction project (Spaceport America, 2011). Construction has not yet been

completed, but it scheduled to be finished sometime during the early part of 2011 (Spaceport

America, 2011). Although the facility is not yet fully operational, revenue is already being

generated through tourism and merchandising, and New Mexico has also already requested

Federal funding for the $200 million-plus project (Spaceport America, 2011). Commercial

flights are scheduled to begin once the spaceport is fully operational.

Many obstacles were encountered during the New Mexico Spaceport project. There

continue to be many financial, political, and physical hurdles to overcome in this project. One of

the main problems lies within the program budget. Originally budgeted at $209 million dollar,

the project has helped put New Mexico into a $450 million deficit (Frosch, 2011). Like any

investment, it takes capitol to start the process—especially when the project has to be built from

the ground up. Developers are now seeing that a second runway may be needed to expand on

commercial operations, and this could significantly raise the construction costs (Frosch, 2011).

New Mexico Government Officials and citizens alike are hopeful that there will be healthy return

on investments from job growth, tourism, and the business partnerships being developed as a

result of this business venture. Officials plan on leaning more toward private industry to further

finance any further costs attributed to the development of Spaceport America (Frosch, 2011).

COLORADO SPACEPORT

35

The space port in southern New Mexico is a work in progress. The official website for

the facility offers a lot of information on the project’s current status and current issues affecting

the completion timeline. Many pictures are available for individuals interested in seeing what the

facility looks like, and what the construction process continues to look like on a daily basis.

Many other documents are also available through the website, such as original impact studies,

newsletters, media releases, public presentations, and informational brochures. Interested

individuals can learn more about Spaceport America by visiting the website, or they can also get

more information on how to reserve a seat on a commercial space flight. Until construction is

completed in 20ll, the facility continues to offer entertainment and knowledge to interested

tourists, while offering economic hope to many New Mexican Citizens.

What’s next for Spaceport America?

With a new Executive Director to the New Mexico Spaceport Authority, Spaceport

America plans on moving forward full-throttle. In early 2011, New Mexico Governor, Susana

Martinez, appointed Christine M. Anderson as the new Spaceport Director (Emerson, 2011).

Anderson is a retired Air Forces official, with an education in mathematics and engineering, and

is sure to bring great experience to the table (Emerson, 2011). The concept of commercial

aerospace is relatively new, therefore it is important that versatile, motivated, personnel head the

program with the flexibility that would allow for overcoming initial unforeseen hiccups.

As the new replacement to Governor Bill Richardson, Governor Susana Martinez also

plans on guiding Spaceport America in a positive direction. Already, since taking office,

Martinez has replaced several of the Spaceport Authority board members (Emerson, 2011). This

was a controversial move on the part of the new governor and according to Emerson, (2011),

Martinez has publically stated; “What we want to do is get a hold of the contract (with Virgin

COLORADO SPACEPORT

36

Galactic) and make sure we know what the long-term commitment is financially," and that the

current Executive Director and board members, " have not been very willing to share the very

hard data of what is the state's commitment long-term." Governor Martinez maintains that she is

dedicated to the Spaceport America project, and that her interests lie in heading the project in the

right direction in order to benefit the State.

The overall goal for a private commercial spaceport in New Mexico remains the need to

for economic growth. Although much of the initial push for the project was focused on keeping

New Mexico heavily involved in the rapidly growing space industry, it was the promise of

economic stimulation that really sold the project. This was especially true for the citizens of

southern New Mexico, who agreed to pay a special tax in order to help fund the project in order

to reap the benefits of thousands of additional jobs and tourism revenue. Spaceport America may

have been a dead concept had it not been for the support of the local citizens. Money was the

motivation behind project support and Government leaders remain optimistic that the project will

indeed pay off for the benefit of all involved.

Takeaways

Studying the processes taken by the people of New Mexico can considerably help other

interested parties to avoid “reinventing the wheel.” Because this is a new concept, there are no

instructions on how to establish a spaceport or spaceport designation. The best bet is to do the

research, see what has worked for others, and understand the unique requirements that may differ

from location to location. The following is a list of six key takeaways that can be extracted from

the history of Spaceport America:

COLORADO SPACEPORT

37

• Purpose—although it had changed direction over time, the task force had a clear

purpose for establishing spaceport. There has to be a clear reason for taking on a

project this big.

• Support—proposing a project of this magnitude takes public and industry support and

backing. Without the proper support, this proposal seems like a farfetched idea.

• Funding—determining the feasibility of this type of project takes several studies.

These studies can become quite expensive. Seed money should be raised to conduct

these studies. This is a product of having the right support and backing as well.

• A Plan—it is not enough to have a good idea on a spaceport, you should also have a

plan on how to make it happen. Whether it by private industry or tax payers, no one is

going to fund an idea without a plan.

• Real estate—Southern New Mexico is a prime location for a spaceport. Mild weather,

terrain, and open skies make for a great location.

• Notoriety—the Spaceport America project has accomplished several tasks in order to

bring media attention to the project. Partnering with a billionaire mogul and hosting

an international competition for the commercial space community were both excellent

ways to keep the public interested in the project’s progress.

Many lessons can be learned from studying New Mexico’s journey of establishing

America’s first private commercial spaceport. We can see that it is not an easy task and it can

take many decades to accomplish. States interested in establishing and building a commercial

spaceport can use the same model and emulate this process in order to gain similar outcomes.

Because States differ in economics, politics, environment, history, and population; it is unclear

whether or not this process will work for all. Realistically, only time will tell how successful this

COLORADO SPACEPORT

38

project actually is. Commercial spaceflight is still in its early stages, and building hubs for this

underdeveloped transportation technology could prove to be a risky investment for any

community willing to take it on.

Future Impact Studies

Impact studies are a natural effort required when proposing a spaceport in Colorado, but

these studies cannot be performed without first being designation as a proposed spaceport state.

After the governor signs the letter designating the State of Colorado as a proposed spaceport

state, impact studies can be conducted. Team 52 identified two major studies that will help

proponents convince decision makers of the viability of a spaceport project. These studies are the

Economic Impact and the Environmental Impact Studies. These studies will require a lot of

effort, funding and each of these studies are separate projects by themselves. This section of the

paper will highlight some of the main areas future studies should cover.

Economic Impact Study Considerations

Having a spaceport in Colorado will obviously have an economic impact to the state,

especially in the local city or county where it is built. Whether this economic impact is positive

or negative is still unknown as the spaceport business is still in its early years and has limited

historical data. A Colorado Spaceport economic impact study is important as it will provide

advocates and decision-makers additional information they will need to decide whether to

support a spaceport effort or not. The purpose of this section is to identify the different areas to

consider when developing an economic impact study for Spaceport Colorado. This section will

briefly examine two economic impact models such as RIMS II and IMPLAN (ACRP, 2008).

Next, it will explain the nature of economic impact of spaceports. Then the paper will focus on

the different economic impact areas pertinent to spaceport operations. Space Industry trends will

COLORADO SPACEPORT

39

also be considered and briefly discussed, as well as the target market that spaceport in Colorado

might try to attract. Finally, this section will discuss future sources of economic impact to

consider if a spaceport was constructed and became operational

Economic impact models.

The spaceport industry of today can be characterized just like air transportation was

characterized in its infancy (Raymond, 1997). Our research identified two different economic

models that were used to conduct economic impact studies at Wallops Island, VA and the

Southwest Region Spaceport, New Mexico. The two models that are widely used in the private

sectors are the Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II) and the Impact Analysis for

Planning (IMPLAN). These economic impact study tools are frequently used by airport

operators, planner, and regulatory agencies to measure the economic value that an airport

contributes to its local and regional surroundings (ACRP, 2008). And, as our research has shown,

these tools were also used in spaceport economic impact studies and should be considered when

conducting when conducting economic studies for the Colorado Spaceport.

Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II)

The first of the economic impact models is RIMS II. Two separate economic impact

studies on the New Mexico Spaceport were conducted by the New Mexico State University and

by Futron Corporation. Both entities used RIMS II multiplier data. According to the Bureau of

Economic Analysis (BEA) RIMS II Handbook, RIMS II is a regional input-output multiplier that

attempts to estimate how much one-time or sustained increase in economic activity in a

particular region will be supplied by industries located in the region. It is widely used by the

public, private and military sectors to estimate the economic impacts of a wide range of projects,

such as building a new sports facility and expanding airports.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

40

The advantages of the RIMS II model are: the accessibility and detail of the main data

source provided by the BEA, easy to understand and low cost, and data can be easily inflated or

deflated depending on the desired year of analysis (ACRP, 2008). However, the consultants of

the 2008 ACRP Synthesis 7 state that one of the disadvantages of RIMS II is that it is a

spreadsheet-based model where the user has to set up the worksheet and every time a new

variable is added the worksheet must be physically changed. Additionally, the BEA RIMS II

Handbook states that RIMS II is a “static equilibrium” model, so impacts have no specific

dimension and assume that impacts occur in 1 year. Because of this, RIMS II does not allow

impacts to be analyzed over time and should be used carefully unless assumptions are made that

input and outputs will be the same for a period of time such as the studies conducted on the New

Mexico Spaceport. The next economic impact model to be covered uses a more dynamic

methodology.

Impact Analysis for Planning (IMPLAN).

Another economic impact model the team looked at is the Impact Analysis for Planning

(IMPLAN) model. The IMPLAN model is more complex and a somewhat more expensive

application of the two models Team 52 has identified because of its dynamic application of

multipliers. The primary sources of data used in IMPLAN are provided by the U.S. Census

Bureau and the BEA (ACRP, 2008). The economic impact study conducted on Wallops Island

used IMPLAN because it allowed them to utilize state and county-specific data versus the RIMS

II is only county-based (Bunch, 2011). The computer-base software-based nature of IMPLAN

gives it an advantage as it allow for easy modification of variables and divides impacts into the

traditional subcategories of direct, indirect, and induced effects (ACRP, 2008). Conversely, the

COLORADO SPACEPORT

41

ACRP of 2008 also states one disadvantage of IMPLAN, and that is data used for this model

must be inflated or deflated before being entered into the system.

Team 52’s research on conducting an economic impact study for a Colorado Spaceport

has identified two potential economic impact models for consideration. The first was RIMS II

which is low cost tool and is widely used in public, private and military applications but has

some limitations because it is not computer-based and a static model. The second was IMPLAN

which is costs considerably higher to use and utilized when larger geographic areas are being

studied. IMPLAN also has its limitations where data has to be manipulated before entry into the

system. There is no indication that any of the models is better suited for a specific class of study,

so the low cost of the RIMS II model makes it the preferred choice for so many studies (ACRP,

2008). If Team 52 succeeds in getting Spaceport Designation for the State of Colorado, the next

obvious step is to conduct an economic impact study using one or both of the above models, and

to look at the nature of economic impact.

The nature of economic impact.

A spaceport in Colorado will be vital to the economic activity of the area where it is

constructed and the state. The spaceport will create a new economy that will generate jobs, new

services, attract different industry sectors, and invigorate existing industries. This section of the

paper will identify the some of the areas that will be impacted by a construction and operation of

a spaceport. Team 52 utilized economic impact studies conducted on other spaceports in the

United States and because of the similarities between spaceport and airport services, the team

also looked into some of the economic activities airports provided to the communities and the

states as a whole.

Types of economic impact.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

42

The Economic Impact of Commercial Space Transportation of the U.S. Economy in 2009

by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) describes economic activity is the value of goods

and services produced in an economy in revenue generated. The Team 52 study will show the

goods and services we believe will be produced by introducing a spaceport in Colorado. There

are three impact components for an economic activity: direct, indirect, and induced (FAA, 2009).

The direct impacts are the expenditures on inputs and labor involved in providing any

final good or service relating to the primary industries analyzed in a report (FAA, 2009). For the

sake of this study, this is the employment and output generated by the spaceport activity. These

revenues will be made possible by the products and services provided and sold by the spaceport

such as operator fees, spaceflight earnings, space cargo earnings etc. The direct earnings impact

of the spaceport will most likely have an indirect impact.

Indirect impacts involve the money that comes to the community through the spaceport,

rather than being generated at the spaceport (ACRP, 2008). These are the expenditures made off

the spaceport as a result of the services within the spaceport and usually linked to visitor

spending. Examples of indirect impacts would be spending by employees and visitors on the

local economy, hotels rooms used by crew members as well as tourists, cost of meals,

entertainment, etc. There may be many more activities in a spaceport that have indirect impacts

to the economy and these all affect next economic impact component of induce impact.

The induced impacts are the successive rounds of increased household spending resulting

from the direct and indirect impacts such as a space operator’s spending on food, clothes dry-

cleaning, or any other household good and service (FAA, 2009). Induced impacts are the direct

and indirect dollars that come to the community through the spaceport and flows through the

local economy. The compounding of direct and indirect impacts is known as the multiplier effect

COLORADO SPACEPORT

43

(DTW, 2006). For example, dollars earned via direct or indirect activities of the spaceport are

passed to employees via their pay. These employees spend a portion of these dollars to purchase

goods and services from other businesses. Businesses use these dollars to make their purchases

to replenish their stock or to pay their employees who also spend their wages in the economy.

Sources of spaceport economic impact.

The Team 52 research from current sources and previous Webster SPSM 6000 studies

have shown that economic impact from a Colorado Spaceport will come from three sources. The

most obvious demanded product from the Colorado Spaceport will be space transportation. This

space transportation impact will come in the form of passengers or space tourist and space cargo.

The second economic impact comes from the fact that a Colorado Spaceport and its other

amenities will attract visitors to State of Colorado and the city where the spaceport will be

located. This visitor impact will come in the form of tourists and business travelers, and the

money they will spend during their short stays. Finally, the third way a spaceport will benefit the

local community is by the presence of businesses at the spaceport facility itself. This spaceport

facility impact will come in the form of retail opportunities to travelers, visitors, and employees.

Space transportation impact.

Space Transportation will be the obvious revenue generator for a Colorado Spaceport and

will come in two forms. First, space tourism, this will involve sending people either on low earth

orbit or to a space station whenever the technology becomes available. Space tourism should be

one of the main factors to consider when conducting an economic impact study for a spaceport in

Colorado. Market studies project that public research, educational, and adventure space

transportation sectors will become significant revenue-producing markets in the foreseeable

future. For example, market studies have shown that “space tourism,” whereby customers pay a

COLORADO SPACEPORT

44

fee to experience suborbital spaceflight, could become a billion-dollar market within 20 years

(FAA, 2009). This study is also supported by separate studies conducted by Futron Corporation

and New Mexico State University on the New Mexico Spaceport effort. If State of Colorado

were to construct a spaceport, efforts should be made to get a company onboard that will provide

space tourism services. Space tourism may account for a good portion economic impact a

spaceport in Colorado, however, the effect of space cargo should not be discounted.

The second aspect of space transportation to be considered for an economic impact study

is space cargo. Space cargo will entail conducting short duration zero gravity technology testing,

sending small satellites on orbit, resupply efforts for space stations, etc. With the coming

retirement of the U.S. Space Shuttle program and with no immediate replacement in sight

including space cargo as part of the spaceport product line only makes sense. Not doing so will

result in the space cargo market share going somewhere else, even to foreign competitors. A

good example happened shortly after President Ronald Reagan removed the Space Shuttle from

commercial payload market due to the 1986 Challenger accident. Two events flowed from that

change: first, international competitors such as Arianespace (European), Russia and China

entered the field, undercutting the newly privatized U.S. launchers on price and reliability; and

second, the small payload market was projected to expand dramatically, attracting a slew of

startup space launch companies (Handberg, 2008). Contributions of space tourism and space

cargo to an economic impact study to the state of Colorado will identify its two main product

lines but other factors such as visitor impact still need to be included.

Visitor impact.

One of the by-products of having a spaceport in Colorado will be an increased number of

visitors to the state. A Commercial Space Pyramid illustrated in a study conducted by the New

COLORADO SPACEPORT

45

Mexico State University showed four types of visitors that a spaceport will attract. Not including

the first level of the pyramid (space passengers), the next three levels of the pyramid represents

the potential number of visitors from families, viewers and regular tourist. These visitors warrant

the Visitor Impact inclusion when accomplishing an economic impact study for a Colorado

spaceport.

A preliminary market demand study stated in Spaceport America’s website estimates that

once visitor infrastructure is complete, the spaceport may experience total annual visitor volume

as high as 562,000 persons… (Spaceport America, 2010). This number might be conservative

but could be as high as The Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex’s visitor count of 1.5

million people per year (Elan, 2006). Visitor spending will not only affect the local economy but

will be felt statewide as visitors will be coming in from airports around the state, driving from

different entry points of the state, staying in hotels, eating at restaurants, buying supplies, etc.

Besides the space launch events visitors will come to see, the Colorado spaceport will most

likely have attractions to highlight the space industry and generate more revenue. Such

attractions describe by the New Mexico State University study as “ancillary businesses” should

be identified and included in an economic impact study effort.

Spaceport impact.

An assortment of non-spaceport specific businesses might operate on the facility of the

spaceport itself. A University of Michigan study; The Economic Impact of the Detroit

Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, 2006 identified some possible contributors to an economic

impact study and for the purpose of the proposed Colorado spaceport should be considered.

These economic impact contributors include revenues from spaceport parking, on-site shopping,

and food and beverage sales. Like airport parking schemes, Team 52 determined that the

COLORADO SPACEPORT

46

Colorado spaceport can have on-spaceport parking with a great view to the launch-pad or

runway, and off-spaceport parking that will include a free shuttle service to transport guests to

viewing points as well as other facilities in the spaceport. Revenue generated by visitor on-site

spending on souvenirs, supplies, as well as food and beverages will be a considerable economic

impact factor. Because of the usually large areas covered by launch viewing points, Team 52

agreed that combination gift shop/convenient store facilities will be best suited for the visitors.

Future sources of economic impact.

If the Colorado spaceport becomes a reality and is constructed, the economic impact

study will also have to include these three factors that will affect growth over time. The

University of Michigan study; The Economic Impact of the Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County

Airport, 2006 identified the first two factors. These two factors were based on the airport

industry but Team 52 believes they apply to spaceports as well. The Futron Corporation study on

the New Mexico Spaceport states that a spaceport has a potential for attracting operators and

manufacturers. The same may be true too for a spaceport in Colorado. Even though Colorado

already has a good presence of companies in the space industry, most of them cater to the

government particularly the military. The third factor Team 52 believes should be considered as

a source economic impact is the growth of space commercialization in Colorado.

The first is renovation and renewal projects. These type projects normally consist of

maintenance of the spaceport and other improvements needed to keep or increase the spaceports

potential for growth. Renovation projects such as these serve to improve the long term value of a

facility and improve the economic impact wherever it’s located. A Colorado Spaceport is no

exception. According to the University of Michigan study, these capital projects therefore have

not only the immediate economic impact by creating demand for construction services, but also

COLORADO SPACEPORT

47

the ongoing economic impact resulting from a superior airport (for this papers purpose a

spaceport).

The second factor identified by the University of Michigan study is a capital

improvement program. Team 52 found a good definition of capital improvement program on

Wikipedia’s website. Wikipedia states that a capital improvement plan (program), or CIP, is a

short-range plan, usually four to ten years, which identifies capital projects and equipment

purchases, provides a planning schedule and identifies options for financing the plan. A good

example of the CIP is the Kennedy Space Center which launched a nearly $70 million, 10-year

renovation of the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex (Elan, 2006). Elan further states that

the effort is to appeal to the changing tastes of the tourists who go there to explore space travel.

Renovation projects of this magnitude serve to improve the long term value of a facility and

improve the economic impact wherever it’s located. Again, a Colorado spaceport will not be an

exception. According to the Colorado Department of Affairs publication; developing a Capital

Improvement Program, one of its advantage is encouraging economic development. It is also

supported by the University of Michigan study which states that the projects themselves have a

direct economic impact where money being spent stays in the community, generates jobs, and

improves the basic economic health of the community.

The third factor Team 52 believes should be considered as a source for future economic

impact is the growth of space commercialization in Colorado. A spaceport in Colorado will

provide a location to meet the space tourism and space cargo market demands. With this, we

believe will be an influx of commercial space business and the growth of commercial space

industry in Colorado. In Futron Corporation’s economic impact study of the New Mexico

spaceport, the long term vision included the creation of a southern New Mexico commercial

COLORADO SPACEPORT

48

space transportation and manufacturing cluster that leverages the spaceport infrastructure and

attracts new industry. This will also hold true in Colorado and will be for both commercial and

government space needs. The National Space Policy of 201 emphasizes the importance of

assuring U.S. access to space and further states that U.S. Government payloads shall be launched

on U.S. vehicles unless exempted by the White House. In December 2008, NASA announced

contract awards to both SpaceX and Orbital for ISS Cargo Resupply Services (CRS),

establishing the two companies as commercial cargo haulers to the ISS (NASA News Release,

2008). The presence of major companies in Colorado already involved in the space industry

provides an opportunistic scenario to outline and develop a spaceport that meets the needs of a

new market.

Environmental Impact Study Considerations

Besides an economic impact to the state, the construction of a spaceport in Colorado will

also have impacts to the environment where it is sited. Just like an airport, a spaceport operator

has to complete research on impacts from its operations before the FAA will grant it a license to

operate. This section of Team 52’s paper will briefly cover some of the environmental aspects a

spaceport operator should consider when conducting an environmental impact study. Team 52

research identified The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) Process as the main

hurdle an operator has to deal with. The next environmental aspect to be discussed is the

identification of the proposed activities that will be performed in the proposed spaceport. Finally

it will briefly cover some of the affected environments where impacts will be felt.

The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) process.

The first thing a prospective space operator needs to consider is what is required to

conduct an environmental study correctly. This requires getting familiar or knowing the NEPA

COLORADO SPACEPORT

49

process. The NEPA process and documentation is a very complex process and could involve

federal, state and local environmental laws. According to the FAA, the licensing of launch and

reentry activities, that is, conducting launches and reentries, operating launch and reentry sites,

and the issuing of experimental permits for reusable suborbital rockets, are considered federal

actions under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In February 2001, the FAA

released the Guidelines for Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and Related

Environmental Review Statutes for the Licensing of Commercial Launches and Launch Sites.

Courses of action for an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement can be

found in the FAA publication. According to the FAA, The National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) requires preparation of an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact

statement for all proposed major federal actions that are not categorically excluded.

Environmental impact studies are needed to identify and document the possible impacts of

activities associated with a new project such as an airport or a spaceport, and identify what

actions to take to minimize or mitigate those impacts. In order to know what the impacts are, the

activities to be conducted in a spaceport need to be identified.

Proposed activities.

An environmental study will address the overall impacts of the proposed operations or

activities expected for the duration of the proposed spaceport. These activities will need to be

identified. For a spaceport, these activities are those linked to the launch and landing of space

vehicles, as well as other activities in the spaceport that support the main operations. As an

example, The Final Environmental Assessment of the Oklahoma Spaceport identified the

following activities in their environmental assessment; transporting the vehicle, vehicle

components, and propellants; assembly of various vehicle components; ground-based tests and

COLORADO SPACEPORT

50

checkout activities; loading the pilot, passengers, and/or other payload; fueling the launch

vehicle; towing or moving the launch vehicle launch or takeoff location; igniting the rocket

motors; collecting any debris from the runway prior to vehicle landing; and recovering and

transporting the launch vehicle from the runway after landing.

Depending on the location of the spaceport, some activities peculiar to an environment

have to be identified. Such activities may be similar to ones in airport operations. These activities

may include deicing and anti-icing of aircraft and airfields (Luther, 2007). Impacts due to

construction activities need to be included in the study. The New Mexico Spaceport is basically a

new construction and such activities where included in their environmental study. Some

spaceports such as Cecil Field use existing facilities such as old military air bases and simply

adapt the facility to space operations. Adapting existing facilities will require certain upgrades

and even new construction to make these usable to spaceport activities. The number of spaceport

activities can vary from spaceport to spaceport so a spaceport operator needs to tailor their

environmental impact study not only to the specific area the spaceport will be constructed but

also the surrounding areas that may be affected.

Affected environments.

The proposed activities of a spaceport will be affecting the environmental and

socioeconomic attributes of the area where it is constructed. The information in the following

subsection will identify and briefly describe those areas with a potential concern. As a minimum,

an environmental study for a Colorado spaceport will need to consider the impact to the

following environments identified in the following paragraphs.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

51

Air quality.

Determining how spaceport operations will affect the ambient air is another affected

environment. Sources of air quality impact in the spaceport will most likely come from the

spacecraft, aircraft, motor vehicles, ground service vehicles and some stationary sources. Air

quality may also be affected out sources outside the spaceport campus if located nearby. Such

sources may power generation plants, and other industrial sources. According to the

Environmental Assessment of the Oklahoma Spaceport, the primary Federal legislation that

addresses air quality is the Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970 (as amended in 1977 and 1990). It

further states that the purpose of the CAA is to preserve air quality and to protect public health

and welfare.

Monitoring measures is a step a spaceport operator can take to keep a close watch on the

air quality. Under the CAA mandate, the EPA established a set of National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, etc. The

NAAQS established “primary” standards to protect public health and “secondary” standards

designed to protect the public welfare by addressing the effects of air pollution on vegetation,

soil, materials, visibility, and other aspects of the general welfare (FAA/AST, 2007). A good

example of an air quality monitoring can be seen at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC). The KSC

uses a Permanent Air Monitoring System (PAMS) which continuously monitors concentrations

of pollutants (NASA, 2003).

Biological resources.

Impact studies should also be conducted on biological resources of the locale the

spaceport will be constructed. The NASA environmental study defined biological resources as

habitats and vegetation and wildlife. According to the NASA study two main spaceport activities

COLORADO SPACEPORT

52

will affect biological resources. The first is construction, and the second is the actual operations

of the spaceport. We believe the same will be true with a Colorado spaceport. The only

difference is the threatened habitat, vegetation and wildlife would be different.

The construction impact identified in the NASA study at the KSC affected mainly

wetlands and other vegetation. The need for more facilities in a spaceport will require the

removal of some biological resources. This case might be similar for a Colorado spaceport

except that the affected habitats might be prairie habitats and the existing plant life. Construction

impact on wildlife will most likely be displacement due to loss of habitat. The impact of

spaceport operations on biological resources is slightly different because it continues after

construction is completed

Once the construction is done, on-going operations will impact whatever biological

resources remain in the area and or passing the area. A major concern mention in the NASA

report in the KSC study was bird collisions. This is true almost anywhere there are flight

operations and processes to prevent this should be proposed in an environmental assessment.

Other impacts from operations are noise, waste disposal, and decrease in water and air quality.

Another part of biological resources would be threatened and endangered species. A

spaceport operator conducting the environmental impact study needs to know what threatened

and endangered species live in the proposed spaceport site. Each affected species needs to be

mentioned in the environmental assessment with an analysis on how the spaceport construction

and operations will affect it.

Historical, architectural, archeological and cultural resources.

A new spaceport or an expansion of an existing airfield can affect historical,

architectural, archeological and cultural resources. The Final Environmental Impact Statement

COLORADO SPACEPORT

53

for the Spaceport America Commercial Launch Site, Sierra County, New Mexico (Nov 2008)

defines cultural resources as follows: “Cultural resources are archaeological sites, architectural

properties, and other historical resources relating to human activities, society, and cultural

institutions that hold communities together and link them to their surroundings. Cultural

resources include past and present expressions of human culture and history in the physical

environment, such as prehistoric and historic archaeological sites, structures, objects, districts,

natural features, and biota, which are considered important to a culture, subculture, or

community. Cultural resources also include aspects of the physical environment that are a part of

traditional lifeways and practices, and are associated with community values and institutions.” A

study needs to be conducted to identify the possible cultural resources that may be affected by

spaceport activities. Furthermore, the study needs to include any adverse effects the spaceport

activities may have on the cultural resources. Finally, the study needs to propose several

alternative actions to decrease the impacts.

Geology and soils.

Another environment that will be affected by spaceport activities and needs to be

included in the study is geology and soils. When the Kennedy Space Center performed their

environmental study for the Space Shuttle extended use, an analysis of the geology and soils of

the area was conducted to understand how activities will affect these resources. Colorado is

comprised of a diverse composition of soils and geological characteristics and an in-depth study

will be necessary to understand any affects by the future spaceport. Impacts from spaceport

construction and operations will have to be identified. Possible construction impact will be site

preparation activities, land clearing and excavation for facility foundations, as well as changes in

water flow patterns (NASA 2007).

COLORADO SPACEPORT

54

Noise.

The noise that will originate from a future spaceport is another environmental impact that

needs to be considered. The noise that will come from the proposed activities will most likely

come from launches and sonic booms. Noise may also come from construction and traffic. From

Team 52 research, the main concern for increased levels of noise is how it will affect both

wildlife and humans working at or visiting the area of operations. Understanding the allowable

noise levels that wildlife and humans are exposed to is important.

The Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Spaceport America Commercial

Launch Site, Sierra County, New Mexico (Nov 2008) identified two organizations that provide

guidance on exposure to noise levels. First, Occupational Safety and Health Administration

(OSHA) regulation 1910.95 establishes a maximum noise level of 90 dBA for a continuous

eight-hour exposure for the work day and higher levels for shorter exposure times in the

workplace. Second, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recommended an average

equivalent noise level of 70 dBA for continuous 24-hour exposure to noise to protect hearing

(EPA, 1974). Depending on the type of spacecraft and other activities conducted in a spaceport

will determine what measures will be developed to protect wildlife and humans from the long

term effects of noise.

Water quality (ground and surface).

Water resources are the next area that will be potentially affected by a spaceport. Water

resources include freshwater, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, coastal resources, floodplains, and

groundwater, reservoirs, etc. These water resources need to be identified in an environmental

study and the effects, if any; the spaceport will have on them.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

55

There are several regulations that control how much an activity can affect existing water

resources for both ground and surface water sources. The Final Environmental Impact Statement

for the Spaceport America Commercial Launch Site, Sierra County, New Mexico (Nov 2008)

named the following regulatory bodies: First, The Clean Water Act; regulates discharges to

surface water and effects to surface water quality through Sections 402 and 404 of the Act. The

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System storm water program, as authorized in Section

402 of the Clean Water Act, controls water pollution by regulating storm water discharges of

pollutants into waters of the United States. Each state will have their own procedures and

protocol prior to any construction activities taking places and the spaceport operator will have to

follow these procedures.

Land use.

The way the land where the spaceport will be sited is also an environmental impact to be

considered. The Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Spaceport America Commercial

Launch Site, Sierra County, New Mexico (Nov 2008) had an extensive definition of “land use”

and it is as follows:

“Land use is interconnected with most of the other resource areas considered in a NEPA

document. The EPA defines land use as…“the way land is developed and used in terms of the

kinds of anthropogenic activities that occur” (EPA, 2007a). Land use refers to the use of land for

economic production; for residential, recreational or other purposes; and for natural or cultural

resource protection.” The Spaceport America EIS further states that depending on the use,

location, and ownership of a particular land parcel, land can be subject to regulations under

Federal, State, local government entities, special districts, or a combination of entities.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

56

Support

In order to pursue spaceport activity in the state of Colorado, support must be garnered

from political, military, industry and social forces. A state government appointed Spaceport

Authority, potentially the Colorado Space Business Roundtable (CSBR) could represent

Colorado’s vital space-related industry is essential for the continued health and future expansion

of this important industry. The Aerospace Colorado Industry Cluster Profile for 2011 stated

Colorado continues to “be a national leader in the space industry with the support of four military

commands, eight major space contractors, and several universities involved in expansive space

research.” According to the profile, Colorado is ranked first in the nation for its concentration of

private aerospace employment with almost 400 companies in the space industry that provide

challenging, highly rewarded employment for 164,000 Coloradoans (Development Research

Partners, 2011).

At the present time there is not a singular state agency or authority to represent this robust

industry to either elected officials of Colorado state government or the people of Colorado,

especially youth and the educators who will prepare them for employment in this industry. One

major consequence is that the political sphere is neither ready to leverage their assistance where

needed nor to benefit from developments in the space industry. Other state governments have

positioned a Spaceport Authority to strengthen their existing space industry. These states include

but are not limited to California, Texas, Ohio, Oklahoma, Florida and New Mexico whose

appointed Space Authorities has developed plans for space tourism and other forward thinking

activities seeking to become key future players in the new era of space transportation.

Colorado has the basic foundation to support a Spaceport Authority already in place with

COLORADO SPACEPORT

57

key organizations such as the Colorado Space Business Roundtable (CSBR) who are active in

political circles. Additionally, the Space Foundation established and hosts the annual National

Space Symposium where leaders from all space industry sectors as well as interested government

officials involved at the forefront of the space industry gather at the Broadmoor Resort in

Colorado Springs to discuss global perspectives on the latest space technologies. A national

organization with a global reach, the Space Foundation, headquartered in Colorado, also supports

public education activities and brings various groups together into a unified organization with the

directed purpose of strengthening the space industry workforce and Science, Technology,

Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) educational programs.

If a Colorado Space Authority were created, it would have the potential to become a

valued and respected support system for Colorado’s economic development, workforce

development and scientific initiatives in the space industry such as a Colorado based spaceport or

NACC. By establishing a Space Authority, the power of various Colorado space organizations

and businesses will be leveraged to strengthen the field and address new developments in the

space industry as well as mitigate workforce problems. A single, strong voice to advance

common positions will provide unified support to the quickly changing commercial driven space

based initiatives of this great state.

Webster’s Capstone Team 52 have taken the first steps towards Colorado’s recognition as

a spaceport state by obtaining support from Mike Kazmierski, President and CEO of the

Colorado Springs Regional Economic Development Corporation, Edgar Johansson, Chairman of

the Colorado Space Business Roundtable (CSBR), as well as educational mentorship from the

former president and current board member of The Space Foundation, Mr. Dick MacLeod. The

next step is to organize the representatives from the various space industry sectors and garner

COLORADO SPACEPORT

58

their support in an effort to advocate further actions to be taken by responsible political officials.

This may be advocating for a Colorado Space Authority to be appointed or requesting Colorado

be considered for federal grants to support spaceport feasibility studies. Regardless, Webster

students should build upon the support structure gained from Team 52.

Conclusion

Colorado is one of the leading space-industry states in the nation, both in the commercial

and government sectors. However, in order to maintain that superior industrial edge and to

exploit its many resources and inherent advantages, Colorado should work towards becoming a

spaceport state. While the end goal of building an active spaceport may be complex, the initial

step is easy. This first step only requires the Governor’s signature on a letter to the Associate

Director for Commercial Space Transportation FAA/AST-1. With this signature, the doors and

opportunities are opened for potential federal funding both for feasibility studies and for future

infrastructure development. This step also puts Colorado on the map of commercial space, and

signals the state’s strong intent to support enterprise and businesses within the commercial space

sector. The benefits of having an active spaceport within the state can be immense and will

ensure that Colorado plays a strong and active role in all future space endeavors.

Recommendations:

• Present the spaceport concept and letter of “proposed” spaceport status to the Governor

of Colorado for his approving signature.

• Webster University and the EDC continue to promote the concept and garner industry

support, potentially leveraging Lockheed Martin’s James H. Crocker’s support.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

59

• Encourage the Colorado Springs Regional Economic Development Center to become the

State of Colorado’s, Aerospace Advocate – with the goal of supporting legislation and

focus on the growth of the Colorado Commercial Space Transportation enterprise.

• Secure support and interest of the Colorado Space Business Roundtable (CSBR) to

support the proposed spaceport status and consider, by decree from the Governor, being

the focus as the Colorado Spaceport Advisory Board or Spaceport Authority.

• Accept continued support of Webster University Space Systems Operations Management

graduate classes. The graduate teams will be well suited to draft proposed information for

inclusion in the FAA/AST 2012 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments

and Concepts, Vehicles, Technologies, and Spaceports report.

COLORADO SPACEPORT

60

References

ACE-Loveland: Where Art and Science Meet. (n.d.). Loveland Chamber of Commerce &

Visitor’s Center. Retrieved from http://www.loveland.org/ACE-Loveland

Airport Cooperative Research Program (2008). ACRP Synthesis 7, Airport Economic Impact

Methods and Model. Retrieved from http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/acrp/

acrp_syn_007.pdf

Attenborough, S. (2011). Virgin Galactic Announces World’s First Commercial Contracts to

Send Researchers to Space. Retrieved from

http://www.virgingalactic.com/news/item/virgin-galactic-to-fly-scientists-to-space/

Chang, K. (2010). In New Space Race, Enter the Entrepreneurs. The New York Times.

Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/08/science/space/08space.

html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

Development Research Partners, Inc. (2011). AEROSPACE, Colorado Industry Cluster Profile.

Retrieved from http://www.spacecolorado.org/files/colorado-space/industry-

overview/Aerospace_2010_CO_123010.pdf

Emerson, K. (2011). Spaceport America. White Sands New Mexico, Retrieved from

http://www.white-sands-new-mexico.com/spaceport_america.htm

FAA. (2011). 2011 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts:

Vehicles, Technologies, and Spaceports. Federal Aviation Administration. Retrieved

from www.faa.gov/about/office_org/.../ast/.../2011%20DevCon%20Report.pdf

COLORADO SPACEPORT

61

Federal Aviation Administration (2008). Volume 1, Final Environmental Impact Statement for

the Spaceport America Commercial Launch Site, Sierra County, New Mexico, November

2008. Retrieved from http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ ast/

media/ Spaceport%20 America-FINAL%20EIS%20Vol%201.pdf

Federal Aviation Administration (2008). Volume 2, Final Environmental Impact Statement for

the Spaceport America Commercial Launch Site, Sierra County, New Mexico, November

2008. Retrieved from http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/

media/ Spaceport%20America-FINAL%20EIS%20Vol%202.pdf

Federal Aviation Administration (2010). The Economic Impact of Commercial Space

Transportation on the U.S. Economy in 2009. Retrieved from http://www.faa.gov/news/

updates/ media/Economic%20Impact%20Study%20September%20 2010_20101026_

PS.pdf

Final Environmental Assessment for the Oklahoma Spaceport, May 2006. Retrieved from

http://www.okspaceport.eis.com/

Foust, J. (2010) Suborbital research gets ready for liftoff. The Space Review. Retrieved from

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1577/1

Frosch, D. D. (2011, February 24). New Mexico's Bet On Space Tourism Stays Earthbound.

New York Times. p. 16. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Futron (2005). New Mexico Commercial Spaceport Economic Impact Study for State of New

Mexico Economic Development Department. Retrieved from

http://www.futron.com/search.xml?search-clause=New+Mexico+Commercial+

Spaceport+Economic+Impact+Study+for+State+of+New+Mexico+Economic+

Development+Department

COLORADO SPACEPORT

62

Gallegos, G. (2010). Governor Bill Richardson announces Rick Homans as Spaceport Executive

Director. Mesilla Valley Economic Development Alliance, Retrieved from

http://www.mveda.com/blog/2010/06/governor-bill-richardson-announces-rick-homans-

as-spaceport-executive-director/

Gomez, L, Gutman, B, Lee, B, & McCune, B. (2007). History of Spaceport America.

Unpublished manuscript, NMSU, Las Cruses, New Mexico. Retrieved from

http://spacegrant.nmsu.edu/isps/presentation/history.pdf

Handberg, R. (2008). State Spaceports: Road to the Economic Future or Hype? Retrieved from

http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/7/9/5/6/pages279568/

p279568-1.php

Heild, C. (2011). Spaceport America faces delays, tough questions. Albuquerque Journal,

Retrieved from http://www.abqjournal.com/news/state/1623176state01-16-11.htm

Hsu, J. (2009). Spaceport Hawaii, Here We Come? Popular Science. Retrieved from

http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-amp-space/article/2009-07/spaceport-hawaii-

here-we-come

Luther, L (2007). Environmental Impacts of Airport Operations, Maintenance, and Expansion.

Retrieved from http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33949.pdf

Messier, D. (2011). Hawaiian Legislature Pushes Ahead on Spaceport Application. Parabolic

Arc. Retrieved from http://www.parabolicarc.com/2011/02/26/hawaiian-

legislature-pushes-spaceport-application/

NASA. (n.d.) NASA Sounding Rocket Science. Retrieved from

http://rscience.gsfc.nasa.gov/srrov.html

COLORADO SPACEPORT

63

NASA. (2010, December 13). NASA Partners With Colorado In Technology Acceleration

Initiative [Press Release]. Retrieved from

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/dec/HQ_10-328_Tech_Signing_prt.htm

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (2007). Final Environmental Assessment for

Expanded Use of the Space Shuttle Landing Facility, September 2007. Retrieved from

http://kscpartnerships.ksc. nasa.gov/ documents/SLF_EA_200809.pdf

National Space Policy of the United States of America. (2010, June 28). Retrieved from

www.whitehouse.gov/sites/.../national_space_policy_6-28-10.pdf

Pankratz, H. (2011, April 6). Loveland close to purchasing campus eyed for Aerospace and

Clean Energy Park. The Denver Post. Retrieved from

http://www.denverpost.com/fdcp?unique=1302755510638

Raymond, J.W. (1997). Airports and Spaceports a Historical Comparison. Retrieved from

http://www.fas.org/spp/eprint/97-0368.pdf

Southwest Research Institute. (2011). SwRI signs contracts to fly eight pioneering missions

with SwRI payload specialists aboard reusable suborbital launchers [Press Release].

Retrieved from http://www.swri.org/PrinterFriendly/TechPrint.asp

Spaceport America. (2011). Spaceport America History. Retrieved from

http://www.spaceportamerica.com/about-us/history.html

Stolley, R. B. (2009). Postcard: Las Cruces. Time, 174(23), 10. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Tuohy, M. (2009). Space: Hawaii's Final Frontier? Honolulu Magazine. Retrieved from

http://www.honolulumagazine.com/Honolulu-Magazine/September-2009/Space-Hawaii-

039s-Final-Frontier/

COLORADO SPACEPORT

64

University of Michigan-Dearborn School of Management (n.d.). The Economic Impact of the

Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, 2006. Retrieve from http://www. metro

airport. com/ pdf/DTW_Economic_Impact_Report.pdf

Vane, C. (2005). Spaceport New Mexico and the X Prize Cup. The Space Review, Retrieved

from http://www.thespacereview.com/article/366/1

Virgin Galactic. (n.d.). Experience the Dream. Retrieved from

http://www.virgingalactic.com/overview/experience/

Ward, S., Tubergen, T., Ludwig, J., Owings, M., Parsons, T. Anderson, R., et al. (2007). The

Space Learning and Lodging Center (SLLC). Retrieved from

http://ereserves.webster.edu/eres/coursepage.aspx?cid=271&page=docs#/sllc_ii_

combined_brief_co…pdf

COLORADO SPACEPORT

65

COLORADO SPACEPORT

66

Dr. George C. Nield FAA/AST-1 Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation 800 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20591 RE: Request Colorado be recognized as a “Proposed” Spaceport State Dr. Nield, I hereby request Colorado be recognized by the FAA/AST in the next FAA/AST Commercial Space Development and Concepts publication and placement on the Spaceport map with 'Proposed' spaceport status. Colorado, with over 164,000 aerospace workers generates billions of dollars in revenue attributable to the aerospace industry, is home to over 140 aerospace companies and is ranked in the top three states in terms of revenue generated from the aerospace industry. We are home to Headquarters Air Force Space Command’s Space Tracking and Warning capabilities with facilities at Peterson, Schriever, and Buckley Air Force Bases, as well as the operational home of the Air Force Satellite Control Network, the Global Positioning System (GPS) used globally for accurate navigation, position determination and timing, the United States Northern Command (NORTHCOM), North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), and the Army Space and Missile Defense Command, Colorado has the unique advantage of having world-class commercial space firms such as Lockheed Martin Space Systems, Ball Aerospace, Boeing, Raytheon, DirecTV, ARINC, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, ITT Industries, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, and hundreds more located in our state, which produce the components and provide the services that make access to space more economical and reliable. Colorado has several world-class institutions of higher learning that continue to keep Colorado at the top of the list in the number of high-tech employees graduated each year and are the recipient of millions of dollars in NASA space research funding. The University of Colorado at Boulder conducting advanced space engineering projects and the National Security Space Institute focused on producing the Nation's professional space force. We are also fortunate to have the Space Foundation, a national nonprofit organization that vigorously advances civil, commercial, and national security space endeavors and educational excellence, and hosts the annual National Space Symposium. The Office of the Governor working closely with the Colorado Springs and Denver Economic Development Corporations recognize the value and strength that the Aerospace Industry brings to Colorado’s Front Range, its economy and its citizenry and hereby proclaims it intends to pursue through research and feasibility studies, as appropriate, our position as a 'Proposed' Spaceport State. Mr. David L. White, Executive Vice President, Marketing of the Colorado Springs Regional Economic Development Corporation, working with graduate students of Webster University’s Space Systems Operations Management graduate program, an associate member of the FAA/AST Commercial Space Transportation – Center of Excellence (CST/COE) partnered with New Mexico State University (NMSU), will be providing information on Colorado’s Proposed Spaceport. Please have your staff contact David (dlwhite.org, 719-884-2835) with guidance on what information your office needs to document our status as a Proposed Spaceport State and submission of information for the next FAA/AST Commercial Space Development and Concepts publication. John W. Hickenlooper Governor, State of Colorado 136 State Capitol Denver, Colorado 80203-1792