Between Sky and Space: NEPA’s Extraterritorial
Application to the Stratosphere and Implications for
SpaceX’s Starlink Satellite Constellation
STEVEN MICHAEL MCKEVETT*
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376
I. The Commercialization of Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 378
A. The Exponential Growth of Commercial Satellites. . . . . . . . . . . . . 379
B. Stratospheric Impacts from Satellite Reentries and Rocket Launches 382
II. NEPA’s Structure, Broad Purpose, and Extraterritorial Application. . . . . 385
A. NEPA’s Structure: Ensuring “Hard Looks”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385
B. NEPA’s Broad Purpose, Text, and Legislative History . . . . . . . . . . 388
C. NEPA’s Extraterritorial Application: Case Law and Executive
Interpretations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
390
2. Environmental Defense Fund v. Massey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391
3. Natural Resources Defense Council v. Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
393
4. Post-Massey Developments ........................... 394
5. CEQ Interpretations of Extraterritorial Application . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
396
III. The Principles of Standing and Widespread Harms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398
A. Injury-In-Fact: Diffuse Harms May be Concrete,
Particularized, and Imminent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399
B. Establishing Causation for Attenuated Chains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404
C. Redressability Standard is Relaxed for Procedural Harms. . . . . . . 406
IV. SpaceX’s Starlink: A Case Study in NEPA’s Extraterrestrial Scope. . . . 408
A. The FCC Grants SpaceX a License for its Gen1 System and
the FAA Issues a FONSI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409
B. The D.C. Circuit Dismisses Environmental Plaintiffs’ Claims. . . . 411
* The George Washington University Law School, LL.M., 2023; University of Washington School
of Law, J.D., 2017; University of Wisconsin-Madison, B.A., 2011. © 2024, Steven Michael McKevett.
The author would like to express his deepest appreciation to Dean Randall S. Abate for his guidance and
feedback throughout the writing process. This Article would not have been possible without him. The
author is also grateful to Dr. William R. Kramer for his insightful thoughts on the direction of space
environmental law. Most importantly, the author wishes to thank his spouse, Jennifer McKevett, for her
encouragement, unwavering support, and willing ear throughout this process.
Disclaimer: Major Steven McKevett serves in the U.S. Air Force Judge Advocate General’s Corps.
This Article was submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Master of Laws in
Environmental & Energy Law at The George Washington University Law School. The views expressed
in this Article are solely those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United
States Air Force, Department of Defense, or U.S. Government.
375
C. The FCC Partially Grants Spacex’s Gen2 System . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
413
D. Navigating Divergent Paths: Outer Space as a Human
Environment”...................................... 417
“
V. Challenging FCC Licensing of Mega-Constellations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420
A. NEPA Extends to Stratospheric Impacts from Satellite Operations . . 421
1. The Stratosphere is Part of the Human Environment . . . . . . . 421
2. NEPA’s Application to the Stratosphere Does Not Violate the
Presumption Against Extraterritoriality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
424
B. Standing for Stratospheric Harms Can be Established . . . . . . . . . . 429
1. Increased Reentries and Satellite Launches May Lead to Concrete,
Particularized, and Imminent Harms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429
2. A Mega-Constellation’s Contributions to Stratospheric Harms is
Sufficient to Satisfy Causation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
. .
.
432
3. Redressability is Easily Met Given NEPA’s Procedural Nature . . 435
C. NEPA’s Application to the Stratosphere Provides Far-Reaching
Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437
1. Preventing Unintended Consequences via NEPA’s
Precautionary Principle .............................. 437
2. Strengthening National Security via Informed Decision
Making . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439
3. Consistency with International Obligations under the Outer
Space Treaty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 442
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444
INTRODUCTION
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (“NEPA”) has been a corner-
stone of American environmental law since its inception, but courts have continually
grappled with NEPA’s scope and whether its provisions apply extraterritorially,
from the high seas
1
to Antarctica.
2
This question has now reached the final fron-
tier. There has been an explosion in the use of satellites in recent years led by
Space Exploration Technologies Corporation’s (“SpaceX”) Starlink.
3
The company’s website describes Starlink as a high-speed, low-latency service that is made possible
via the world’s largest constellation of highly advanced satellites operating in a low orbit around Earth. See
World’s Most Advanced Broadband Satellite Internet, STARLINK, https://www.starlink.com/technology
(last visited Mar. 12, 2023).
SpaceX’s
deployment of its First Generation Starlink system (“Gen1”) and recently
1. Compare Nat. Res. Def. Council v. U.S. Dep’t Navy, No. CV-01-07781 CAS(RZX), 2002 WL
32095131, at *11 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 17, 2002) (noting the high seas are a global commons akin to
Court finds that there is no legal or policy reason to extend NEPA to the high seas.”).
2. Compare Env’t Def. Fund, Inc. v. Massey, 986 F.2d 528, 532-33 (D.C. Cir. 1993) (holding that
NEPA’s application to activities in Antarctica does not present an issue of extraterritoriality and
distinguishing NEPA from the Federal Tort Claims Act), with Smith v. United States, 507 U.S. 197, 204
(1993) (holding that the Federal Torts Claim Act does not apply to activities in Antarctica and its
application is barred by the presumption against extraterritoriality).
3.
376 THE GEORGETOWN ENVTL. LAW REVIEW [Vol. 36:375
approved Second Generation Starlink system (“Gen2”) has renewed the discus-
sion regarding NEPA’s scope—and whether the statute can be applied extrater-
restrially.
4
Although the growth in satellite use will undoubtedly provide benefits
to mankind, there are growing concerns about the environmental impact of these
mega-constellations,
5
NASA defines “large constellations” as those containing at least 100 active satellites. U.S. GOV’T
ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE, GAO-22-105166, LARGE CONSTELLATIONS OF SATELLITES: MITIGATING
ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER EFFECTS 3 (2022), https://perma.cc/N9DR-VMLH [hereinafter GAO
ASSESSMENT] (citing NASA, Orbital Debris Mitigation Standard Practices at 7 (Nov. 2019), https://
perma.cc/QXL9-F8QC).
ranging from orbital debris and collisions to light pollution
and impacts to the atmosphere.
6
See, e.g., Aaron C. Boley & Michael Beyers, Satellite Mega-Constellations Create Risks in Low
Earth Orbit, the Atmosphere and on Earth, SCI. REP., May 20, 2021, at 1, 5, https://perma.cc/TCF3-C99P.
There have been a number of scholarly articles published examining NEPA’s
application to space.
7
E.g., Michael B. Runnels, On Launching Environmental Law into Orbit in the Age of Satellite
Constellations, 88 J. AIR L. & COM. 181 (2023), https://perma.cc/WW3F-LNAQ; Alexander Q. Gilbert &
Monica Vidaurri, Major Federal Actions Significantly Affecting the Quality of the Space Environment:
Applying NEPA to Federal and Federally Authorized Outer Space Activities, 44 ENVIRONS ENV’T. L. &
POL’Y J. 233 (2021), https://perma.cc/L2G2-HF9A; Michael J. Ellis, Keep Environmental Red Tape Out of
Outer Space, Heritage Foundation Legal Memorandum No. 288 (Aug. 6, 2021), https://perma.cc/44ME-
V23R; Ramon J. Ryan, Note, The Fault in Our Stars: Challenging the FCC’s Treatment of Commercial
Satellites as Categorically Excluded from Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act, 22
VAND. J. ENT. & TECH. L. 923 (2020).
Alexander Gilbert and Monica Viadurri published an article
in 2021 specifically advocating for the application of NEPA to federally author-
ized outer space activities.
8
The authors examine this broader question while rec-
ognizing that they are not analyzing whether NEPA would require analysis of a
specific environmental impact.
9
This Article will not rehash the question of NEPA’s extraterrestrial application.
Instead, this Article extends Gilbert and Viadurri’s work by examining Starlink
and other mega-constellations’ impact on the stratosphere—especially in light of
the FCC’s repeated refusal to conduct an Environmental Assessment (“EA”) for
Starlink’s Gen1 and Gen2 systems.
10
Space Expl. Holdings, LLC, Request for Modification of the Authorization for the SpaceX NGSO
Satellite Sys., 36 F.C.C. Rcd. 7995, 8036 (2021), https://perma.cc/BSP9-BNAD [hereinafter Final Gen1
Order] (authorizing modification for SpaceX’s Gen1 Starlink system); Space Expl. Holdings, LLC,
Request for Orbital Deployment and Operating Authority for the SpaceX Gen2 NGSO Satellite Sys., File
No: SAT-LOA-20200526-00055 and SAT-AMD-20210818-00105 para. 103 (2022) (partially granting
SpaceX’s Gen2 Starlink system) [hereinafter Final Gen2 Order].
Although it is uncertain whether NEPA
applies to space, NEPA should be interpreted to apply to the Earth’s stratosphere,
which is part of the “human environment.” Moreover, NEPA’s application to the
stratosphere does not trigger the presumption against extraterritoriality because it
is a global commons area akin to Antarctica or the high seas and the “focus” of the
4. Although there is significant literature and case law regarding NEPA’s extraterritorial
application (i.e., the statue’s application outside of the United States), the statute’s extraterrestrial
application (i.e, outer space) is unknown.
5.
6.
7.
8. Gilbert & Vidaurri, supra note 7.
9. Id. at 241.
10.
2024] BETWEEN SKY AND SPACE 377
