Environmental groups are suing the Federal Aviation Administration in federal court over SpaceX's launch of its massive Starship rocket last month. The groups argue that the agency failed to adequately investigate the potential harm the launch – or a mishap – could do to the surrounding environment.

The rocket, which is the most powerful ever built, took off from a launch pad at SpaceX's privately owned spaceport in South Texas on April 20 before exploding over the Gulf of Mexico about four minutes into flight.

The lawsuit, which was filed Monday in a federal court in Washington, D.C., alleges that the FAA authorized the launch "without complying with bedrock federal environmental law, without fully analyzing the significant environmental and community impacts of the Space X launch program – including destruction of some of the most vital migratory bird habitat in North America – and without requiring mitigation sufficient to offset those impacts."

The lawsuit says the area around the launch is essential habitat to federally protected species, including the endangered ocelot.

"It's vital that we protect life on Earth even as we look to the stars in this modern era of spaceflight," Center for Biological Diversity senior attorney Jared Margolis said in a statement.

The FAA declined to comment on the active litigation.

'All kinds of environmental harm'

Ahead of the launch on April 20, the FAA issued a finding that the launch would have no significant impact on its surrounding environment. Therefore, the agency didn't proceed with a more in-depth environmental assessment, which would have taken more time.

Margolis told CNN that the SpaceX explosion proves the groups' legal argument that the FAA erred in its decision-making.

"They just proved our point here," Margolis said. "What ended up occurring was exactly what we expected. There's all kinds of environmental harm that's clearly an issue and needs to be fully considered, and they didn't consider it."

Environmental groups are suing the FAA in hopes the agency will go back and do a far more comprehensive environmental analysis of the impacts of the launch. Margolis said a more in-depth environmental analysis from FAA could have issued a finding that SpaceX needed to use more water to cool down its launch pad, which ended up exploding.

Margolis argued that even when launches don't end in a massive explosion, they still can present a danger to bird species that use the area for migratory routes.

"It's an incredibly important area for birds," Margolis said. "There's an incredible amount of heat and light from the launches even when they don't go wrong."

Video above: SpaceX Starship explodes after launch

Margolis said the impact of scattered debris from the explosion isn't over yet; environmental groups are concerned that recovery efforts of trucks and other heavy equipment to pick up residual metal and concrete could further harm wildlife.

"You have so much [debris] in the area that recovering it could cause even more damage," he said.

The FAA's role

The FAA licenses commercial rocket launches and gave the green light for the SpaceX launch attempt after more than a year of back-and-forth.

The agency is also currently charged with overseeing a mishap investigation into what caused the Starship's failed test flight last month. Such investigations are routine and have taken place after previous – but smaller-scale – Starship test launches in South Texas.

The FAA's review "will determine the root cause of the event and identify corrective actions the operator must implement to avoid a recurrence," the agency said in an emailed statement last week.

Separately, the FAA is also carrying out an "anomaly response plan," which is part of the Programmatic Environmental Assessment the FAA issued for Starship in 2022.

"SpaceX is responsible for its implementation and for local, state and federal compliance requirements," FAA spokesperson Steve Kulm said via email on Sunday.

When asked whether the FAA could confirm if debris reached areas that it was not expected to reach, Kulm said that Cameron County – which encompasses SpaceX's facilities near Boca Chica Beach – "issued a statement to address all inquiries regarding the dust to be sent to SpaceX."

CNN has reached out to SpaceX for comment on the lawsuit, though the company typically does not respond to routine requests for comment from reporters. SpaceX is not named as a defendant on the suit.

Metal 'hurled thousands of feet away'

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also said in a statement last week that it was working with SpaceX, the FAA and other involved parties to "provide on-the-ground guidance to minimize further impacts and reduce long-term damages to natural resources."

That activity includes ensuring that SpaceX is complying with the Endangered Species Act, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service, which became the subject of concern after reports that debris from the launch or explosion may have reached nearby protected wildlife areas.

"Following the launch and mid-air explosion, Cameron County closed Boca Chica Beach and State Highway 4 for 48 hours due to launch pad safety concerns, which prevented Service staff from accessing refuge-owned and managed land," the agency's statement reads. "Once the closure ended, Service staff began their assessment of the launch impacts at 10 a.m. April 22, 2023."

The agency cataloged some of the impacts:

• "Numerous large concrete chunks, stainless steel sheets, metal and other objects hurled thousands of feet away along with a plume cloud of pulverized concrete that deposited material up to 6.5 miles northwest of the pad site," according to the statement. Locals in Port Isabel reported a strange dust settling over the community after launch.
• "Although no debris was documented on refuge fee-owned lands, staff documented approximately 385 acres of debris on SpaceX's facility and at Boca Chica State Park, which is leased by the Service and managed as a component of the Lower Rio Grande National Wildlife Refuge," the statement reads.
• "Additionally, a 3.5-acre fire started south of the pad site on Boca Chica State Park land. At this time, no dead birds or wildlife have been found on refuge-owned or managed lands," the agency said.

SpaceX's take

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk said during a Twitter Spaces chat on Saturday evening that he believed SpaceX would be ready to launch Starship on another test flight within six to eight weeks from a technological standpoint.

When asked about potential legal backlash from environmental groups on Saturday, Musk was defiant. "Look at an aerial picture... apart from the area around the launch stand – tell me where things are damaged. ... I think you can't even see it at this point," Musk said.

"To the best of our knowledge, there has not been any meaningful damage to the environment," Musk added.

Musk said he was "glad to report that the pad damage is actually quite small," though it would take "six to eight weeks" to get the infrastructure prepared for another launch.

This story has been updated with additional information.

The Federal Aviation Administration has released new concerning data pointing to a sharp uptick in dangerous laser strikes against aircraft such as airplanes and helicopters.

The agency reported that 9,723 laser incidents happened in 2021 alone, which is up from 6,853 incidents in 2020. That represents a 41% increase in just one year, making 2021 the year with the highest number of reported incidents ever, the FAA said.

The agency says that these laser strikes remain a "serious threat" to aviation safety and it is against federal law to intentionally point lasers at aircraft.

There have been jail sentences for those who are caught, and law enforcement has tried to offer rewards for information leading to an arrest for persons who have committed such crimes. Civil penalties imposed by the FAA up to $30,800 have been levied for multiple incidents. Fines can go up to $11,000 for breaking anti-laser laws.

The FAA says that at least 244 injuries have been reported since 2010 for laser strike incidents.

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. —

Heads up, future space travelers: No more commercial astronaut wings will be awarded from the Federal Aviation Administration after this year.

The FAA said Friday it's clipping its astronaut wings because too many people are now launching into space and it's getting out of the astronaut designation business entirely.

The news comes one day ahead of Blue Origin's planned liftoff from West Texas with former NFL player and TV celebrity Michael Strahan. He and his five fellow passengers will still be eligible for wings since the FAA isn't ending its long-standing program until Jan. 1.

NASA's astronauts also have nothing to worry about going forward — they'll still get their pins from the space agency.

All 15 people who rocketed into space for the first time this year on private U.S. flights will be awarded their wings, according to the FAA. That includes Blue Origin founder Jeff Bezos and Virgin Galactic's Richard Branson, as well as the other space newbies who accompanied them on their brief up-and-down trips. The companies handed out their own version of astronaut wings after the flights.

All four passengers on SpaceX's first private flight to orbit last September also qualified for FAA wings.

Adding Blue Origin's next crew of six will bring the list to 30. The FAA' s first commercial wings recipient was in 2004.

Earlier this year, the FAA tightened up its qualifications, specifying that awardees must be trained crew members, versus paying customers along for the ride. But with the program ending, the decision was made to be all-inclusive, a spokesman said.

Future space tourists will get their names put on a FAA commercial spaceflight list. To qualify, they must soar at least 50 miles on an FAA-sanctioned launch.

"The U.S. commercial human spaceflight industry has come a long way from conducting test flights to launching paying customers into space," the FAA's associate administrator Wayne Monteith said in a statement. "Now it's time to offer recognition to a larger group of adventurers daring to go to space."

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

The Federal Aviation Administration confirmed late Wednesday it is investigating Richard Branson's flight to space, saying the rocket-powered plane operated by his company, Virgin Galactic, veered off course during its descent.

The FAA's statement came not long after the New Yorker's Nicholas Schmidle reported that warning lights had shown up on the dashboard of Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo — signaling that the vehicle was on a wayward trajectory — as the company's billionaire founder, Richard Branson, was riding in it during a minutes-long joyride-slash-PR-event that reached the edge of space. Schmidle also revealed the existence of the FAA investigation.

Virgin Galactic will not be permitted to conduct another spaceflight until the FAA's "mishap investigation" concludes, as is standard during such investigations, the FAA confirmed on Thursday. The company previously said it was entering a months-long, self-imposed no-fly period anyway, as the company works to refurbish some of its hardware. But as recently as Thursday morning, the company said it was targeting later this month or early October for its next flight. It's not clear if that schedule will hold.

"Virgin Galactic may not return the SpaceShipTwo vehicle to flight until the FAA approves the final mishap investigation report or determines the issues related to the mishap do not affect public safety," according to a statement from the FAA.

The company's stock dipped about 4% during trading hours Thursday.

Virgin Galactic spokesperson Barney Gimbel confirmed in an email to CNN Business that the trajectory of the flight "changed," adding that "when the glide cone message indicated that the pilots should modify the flight path to adjust the trajectory, our pilots did exactly as they were trained and followed the procedures."

In its initial statement Wednesday afternoon, the company defended the safety of the flight, which had been dubbed "Unity 22," saying that it disputes what it termed "the misleading characterizations and conclusions" in Schmidle's article.

"Unity 22 was a safe and successful test flight that adhered to our flight procedures and training protocols. When the vehicle encountered high altitude winds which changed the trajectory, the pilots and systems monitored the trajectory to ensure it remained within mission parameters," the company said.

"Although the flight's ultimate trajectory deviated from our initial plan, it was a controlled and intentional flight path that allowed Unity 22 to successfully reach space and land safely at our Spaceport in New Mexico. At no time were passengers and crew put in any danger as a result of this change in trajectory," it said.

The statement added that the pilots of the spaceplane encountered high-altitude winds, and "responded appropriately to these changing flight conditions."

But in a separate statement in response to the FAA investigation, it also acknowledged that the flight "deviated from our initial plan" and the spacecraft dropped below the altitude it was approved to fly at for one minute and 41 seconds.

"At no time did the ship travel above any population centers or cause a hazard to the public," the company said. "FAA representatives were present in our control room during the flight and in post-flight debriefs. We are working in partnership with the FAA to address the airspace for future flights."

Virgin Galactic did not respond to follow-up questions about the reported warning lights in the cockpit of the spacecraft during Branson's flight.

The pilots of the rocket-powered, supersonic SpaceShipTwo were faced with yellow and red warning indicators as the vehicle veered off course, according to Schmidle's report.

The wayward orientation of the vehicle put the vehicle off-kilter for its descent back to Earth, which could have forced it to make an emergency landing in the New Mexican desert, according to the article.

The new report adds to several bombshell scoops Schmidle has had about the company's safety record, which its executives and PR officials have tried to sweep under the rug to save face among Virgin Galactic's wealthy clientele and would-be space travelers.

Branson's flight was only the fourth trip to space that Virgin Galactic has successfully completed following a tragic 2014 test flight that killed one pilot and badly injured another. And of those four trips, at least two have had serious safety issues. A test fight in 2019 — which was the first to include a passenger, Virgin Galactic engineer Beth Moses — nearly ended very differently due to a serious problem with the space plane's wing, according to Schmidle, who also wrote "Test Gods," a recently-published book about Virgin Galactic and years he spent with inside access to the company.

"This should have been a come-to-Jesus moment, not the kind of thing you brush under the rug," Todd Ericson, Virgin Galactic's former vice president of safety, who has since resigned from the company, told Schmidle last year.

Neither the FAA nor Virgin Galactic publicly disclosed the issues associated with the 2019 flight or Branson's flight.

The FAA did not respond to requests for additional comment.

The Federal Aviation Administration is stepping up inspections of Boeing 777 airplanes equipped with certain Pratt & Whitney PW4000 engines and it's likely some will be removed from service, according to a statement from FAA Administrator Steve Dickson."We reviewed all available safety data following yesterday's incident," Dickson said, referring to the United Airlines flight that was forced to return to Denver International Airport Saturday after it suffered an engine failure shortly after takeoff."Based on the initial information, we concluded that the inspection interval should be stepped up for the hollow fan blades that are unique to this model of engine, used solely on Boeing 777 airplanes," Dickson said."The FAA is working closely with other civil aviation authorities to make this information available to affected operators in their jurisdictions," Dickson said.