Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 1 of 84
`
` 
`
`
`NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION
`ASSOCIATION, 777 6th Street NW, Suite 700
`Washington DC 20001;
`
`ONE HUNDRED MILES, 403 G Street,
`Brunswick, GA 31520;
`
`LITTLE CUMBERLAND ISLAND HOMES
`ASSOCIATION, INC., 145 Hampton Point
`Drive, First Floor, St. Simons, GA 31522; and
`
`CARETTA FOUNDATION, INC., 4090 Livsey
`Road, Tucker, GA 30084;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`Civil Action No. _______________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,
`800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
`20591;
`
`DANIEL MURRAY, 800 Independence Avenue
`SW, Washington, DC 20591; and
`
`JAMES REPCHECK, 800 Independence
`Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
`
`NATURE OF THE CASE
`
`The Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) issued a launch site operator
`
`1.
`
`license (the “License” or “Launch Site Operator License”) authorizing Camden County (the
`
`“Applicant” or the “County”) to operate Spaceport Camden, a proposed commercial spaceport
`
`that would launch rockets directly over a national seashore and populated areas. The FAA’s
`
`decision to license a site where rockets would launch over people, homes, and Cumberland
`
` 
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 2 of 84
`
` 
`
`Island National Seashore (“the National Seashore”) is contrary to the agency’s regulations for
`
`licensing launch sites and is unprecedented in the history of the United States’ commercial space
`
`program.
`
`2.
`
`In issuing this license, the FAA failed to properly evaluate the project as required
`
`by the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), Section 4(f) of the Department of
`
`Transportation Act (“Section 4(f)”), Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
`
`(“Section 106”), the FAA’s regulations at 14 C.F.R. Part 420 (License to Operate a Launch Site),
`
`and the enabling legislation for Cumberland Island National Seashore. When the County
`
`changed the project to focus on more failure-prone small rockets, the FAA failed to revisit its
`
`environmental review despite its own conclusion doing so is unlawful. The FAA based its review
`
`of this revised project on a non-existent rocket proposed by the County for the sole purpose of
`
`trying to satisfy the FAA’s safety regulations. And even then, the FAA violated the plain
`
`language of its own regulations in issuing the License.
`
`JURSDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`This action arises under the Commercial Space Launch Act, 51 U.S.C. § 50901 et
`
`seq., NEPA, 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq., Section 4(f), 49 U.S.C. § 303 et seq., Section 106, 54
`
`U.S.C. § 306101. et seq., the enabling legislation for Cumberland Island National Seashore, 16
`
`U.S.C. § 459i et seq., and the Administrative Procedure Act (the “APA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 701–706.
`
`4.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question) and
`
`may issue a declaratory judgment and grant further relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201–2202.
`
`Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to the APA. 5 U.S.C. § 702.
`
`5.
`
`Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e)(1)(A),
`
`(B), and (C). A substantial part of the events and omissions giving rise to this Complaint
`
` 
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 3 of 84
`
` 
`
`occurred in this judicial district, Plaintiff National Parks Conservation Association is a resident
`
`of this district, and the Defendants are residents of this district.
`
`PARTIES AND STANDING
`
`The Conservation Group Plaintiffs
`
`6.
`
`Plaintiff National Parks Conservation Association is a nonprofit organization
`
`dedicated to protecting and enhancing America’s National Park System for present and future
`
`generations. National Parks Conservation Association has 1.6 million members and supporters
`
`across the country. National Parks Conservation Association’s principal place of business is
`
`located in Washington, D.C.
`
`7.
`
`National Parks Conservation Association believes that the shortcomings in the
`
`FAA’s review of Spaceport Camden and its decision to issue the License has harmed and will
`
`continue to harm its organizational interests and the interests of its members. This harm includes
`
`impeding access to the National Seashore and limiting recreational opportunities there, exposing
`
`visitors to risk of injury or death, and jeopardizing the historic and natural resources found on
`
`Cumberland Island. National Parks Conservation Association and its members believe their use
`
`and enjoyment of Cumberland Island and the surrounding areas will be diminished as a result of
`
`the FAA’s decision to issue the License.
`
`8.
`
`National Parks Conservation Association relies on information and access to the
`
`National Seashore to conduct its organizational activities, including member outreach and
`
`events. As recently as 2019, National Parks Conservation Association conducted a group outing
`
`for key donors and supporters on Cumberland Island. This trip required extensive scheduling and
`
`advance planning. National Parks Conservation Association would like to conduct similar trips
`
`in the future, but believes that the lack of information regarding Spaceport Camden’s operations
`
` 
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 4 of 84
`
` 
`
`and the potential access restrictions required for its operation will make it more difficult to
`
`conduct trips like this in the future.
`
`9.
`
`National Parks Conservation Association also has members and staff that visit,
`
`recreate, use, and enjoy the National Seashore and surrounding areas. These members and staff
`
`intend to continue using this area in the future, but believe their use and enjoyment of the area,
`
`including the northern part of Cumberland Island and the adjacent marsh, will be diminished.
`
`Plaintiff and its members believe that these concerns would be addressed by a favorable
`
`resolution of this suit.
`
`10.
`
` One member of National Parks Conservation Association has lived on
`
`Cumberland Island for over four decades. Her home is on the northern end of the Island and one
`
`of the few private residences on the Island. It is located directly under the proposed flightpath of
`
`launches from Spaceport Camden. She has advocated for the preservation of Cumberland Island,
`
`its diverse ecosystems, and its ecological value for decades. She participates in a variety of
`
`scientific research regarding sea turtles and other species on the Island. She also recognizes and
`
`values the importance of the Island’s wilderness character, and that people come to Cumberland
`
`for a respite from the over-developed mainland. She is concerned Spaceport Camden and the
`
`License will result in damage to her property; the historical hazardous waste at the launch site;
`
`landowner and visitor access; safety within the “limited access area;” noise and light impacts;
`
`harm to wildlife and habitat; impairment of wilderness values; and catastrophic rocket failures.
`
`She is also concerned that Spaceport Camden and the License will have a negative impact on the
`
`health of the salt marsh in the area. She fears that rocket failures and the resulting cleanup will
`
`damage the marsh. She also fears that damage that will occur during normal operations because
`
`publicly-owned salt marsh is contained in the site’s debris dispersion area.
`
` 
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 5 of 84
`
` 
`
`11. Another member of National Parks Conservation Association lives in
`
`Washington, D.C. but has a family house in coastal Georgia. She has visited Cumberland Island
`
`at least eight times and has boated extensively in the area. Among other areas, she has boated in
`
`the Intracoastal Waterway along Cumberland Island and in Christmas Creek. She has
`
`participated in right whale, shorebird, and sea turtle research on Cumberland Island, Little
`
`Cumberland Island, and surrounding waterways. She is concerned that Spaceport Camden and
`
`the License will have a negative effect on Cumberland Island and its natural resources. She fears
`
`that Spaceport Camden and the License will make it more difficult for visitors like her to visit
`
`and enjoy the island. Now that she lives elsewhere, visiting Cumberland Island requires
`
`extensive advance planning that will be thwarted due to the planned access restrictions. She
`
`plans to visit Cumberland Island with her children in the near future, potentially during a planned
`
`visit to coastal Georgia in August 2022.
`
`12. Plaintiff One Hundred Miles is a nonprofit organization focused on protecting and
`
`preserving Georgia’s 100-mile coast. One Hundred Miles’ advocacy and education teams work
`
`hand-in-hand with its members and public to ensure that they have the knowledge and tools to
`
`make their voices heard for the coast they love. One Hundred Miles’ principal place of business
`
`is located in Brunswick, Georgia.
`
`13. One Hundred Miles believes that the shortcomings in the FAA’s review of
`
`Spaceport Camden and its decision to issue the License has harmed and will continue to harm
`
`its organizational interests and the interests of its members. This harm includes impeding access
`
`to the National Seashore and limiting recreational opportunities there, exposing visitors to risk
`
`of injury or death, jeopardizing the historic and natural resources found on Cumberland Island,
`
`and risk of damage to coastal marsh areas. One Hundred Miles and its members believe their
`
` 
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 6 of 84
`
` 
`
`use and enjoyment of Cumberland Island and the surrounding areas will be diminished as a
`
`result of the FAA’s decision.
`
`14. One Hundred Miles also relies on information and access to the National Seashore
`
`to conduct its organizational activities, including member outreach and events. Plaintiff One
`
`Hundred Miles has conducted a group outing for key donors and supporters on Cumberland
`
`Island. These trips require extensive scheduling and advance planning. Plaintiff One Hundred
`
`Miles plans to conduct similar trips in the future, believes that the lack of information regarding
`
`Spaceport Camden’s operations and the potential access restrictions required for its operation
`
`will make it more difficult to conduct trips like this in the future. The lack of information
`
`regarding Spaceport Camden and the License also prevents One Hundred Miles from providing
`
`its members with complete information regarding the project and how it will affect Georgia’s
`
`coastal resources.
`
`15. One Hundred Miles also has members and staff that visit, recreate, use, and enjoy
`
`the National Seashore and surrounding areas. These members and staff intend to continue using
`
`this area in the future, but believe their use and enjoyment of the area, including the northern
`
`part of Cumberland Island and the adjacent marsh, will be diminished. Plaintiff and its members
`
`believe that these concerns would be addressed by a favorable resolution of this suit.
`
`16. One member of One Hundred Miles lives in St. Marys, Georgia. He owns a
`
`historic home and rents out rooms to guests. Almost every guest is traveling to or from
`
`Cumberland Island. He also has a captain’s license and offers chartered boat trips to Cumberland
`
`Island. He is currently upgrading the boat to allow for easier access to more remote portions of
`
`the Island. He is concerned restrictions on access to Cumberland Island, or even uncertainty
`
`around access, will cause guests to cancel their reservations and will negatively affect his rental
`
` 
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 7 of 84
`
` 
`
`and boat charter businesses. He has these same concerns for access restrictions on the
`
`Intracoastal Waterway.
`
`17. Another member of One Hundred Miles retired to St. Marys, Georgia because of
`
`her love for the treasure that is Cumberland Island. She has visited Cumberland Island nearly
`
`twenty times in the last several years. She values its ecological, historical, and architectural
`
`resources as well as the mental health benefits of visitation to green spaces. She has traveled up
`
`the trail to the northern end of the Island in the morning and come down the beach on the way
`
`back. One of her concerns with Spaceport Camden is the recurring closures of waterways and
`
`portions of Cumberland Island, and the impacts these restrictions will have on her access and
`
`travel plans. She would hate to lose the ability to plan her trips and experiences on the Island in
`
`advance. She also has concerns that Spaceport Camden will negatively affect the remote and
`
`undisturbed experience of Cumberland Island, because there are not many places left without
`
`paved roads and cell phones.
`
`18. Collectively, Plaintiffs National Parks Conservation Association and One
`
`Hundred Miles are referred to herein as the “Conservation Group Plaintiffs.”
`
`The Homeowner Plaintiffs
`
`19. Plaintiff Little Cumberland Island Homes Association, Inc. (“LCIHA”) was
`
`formed in 1965 with the primary purpose that Little Cumberland Island be “maintained in its
`
`natural state, including wildlife preservation,” with provision for shareholders to build homes
`
`that must preserve the Island in as close to a natural state as possible. LCIHA’s shareholders are
`
`the owners of 100 residential lots on Little Cumberland Island. Forty-three lots have private
`
`homes and fifty-seven lots have been left in their natural state. LCIHA owns the remaining
`
`property on Little Cumberland Island as common area for its shareholders.
`
` 
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 8 of 84
`
` 
`
`20. LCIHA is responsible for ensuring that Little Cumberland Island remains in its
`
`natural state. If any conflict arises between a shareholder’s use of Little Cumberland Island and
`
`the conservation of the Island’s natural state, the natural state of the Island controls.
`
`21. When Congress established Cumberland Island National Seashore, it included
`
`Little Cumberland Island within its boundaries. In 1975, LCIHA entered an Agreement with the
`
`United States governing the management of Little Cumberland Island. This agreement
`
`acknowledged that LCIHA has the primary right and obligation for preservation of the Island.
`
`22. Little Cumberland Island is approximately three miles long and is immediately
`
`north of Cumberland Island, separated by a tidal creek named Christmas Creek. It is bordered by
`
`the Atlantic Ocean on the east, the Intracoastal Waterway on the west, and St. Andrews Sound to
`
`the north. The Little Cumberland Island Lighthouse was built in the 1800s to guide ships across
`
`St. Andrew’s Sound and is listed in the National Register of Historic Places.
`
`23. Little Cumberland Island is accessible by boat using a dock maintained by
`
`LCIHA in Shell Creek, a tidal creek off the Cumberland River/Intracoastal Waterway. The
`
`interior of Little Cumberland Island is primarily prehistoric sand dune ridges with occasional
`
`ephemeral, freshwater sloughs. Maritime oak and pine forest dominates the tree canopy, with a
`
`saw palmetto understory. Unlike most other Georgia barrier islands, Little Cumberland Island
`
`was never subjected to intensive agricultural activities, so the ecosystem is relatively
`
`undisturbed. LCIHA’s shareholders use Little Cumberland Island for its aesthetic, ecological,
`
`historic, and recreational values, and its primitive character. These will all be lessened by the
`
`FAA’s license to operate a launch site at Spaceport Camden.
`
`24. LCIHA shareholders enjoy the Island’s dark skies for viewing planets and stars,
`
`but this activity will be impaired by light from the Spaceport’s operation. The Final EIS states
`
` 
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 9 of 84
`
` 
`
`launch pad light towers would “rise above the surrounding forest” and be visible from
`
`Cumberland Island National Seashore. Final EIS at 4-33. The Final EIS recognized that
`
`Spaceport Camden “would introduce light emissions into an area that is dark and part of a valued
`
`viewshed for the Cumberland Island National Seashore.” Final EIS at 4-34. Light from these
`
`towers and noise and light from rocket launches will impair the primitive character, solitude, and
`
`unimpaired natural resources of Little Cumberland Island that are valued by LCIHA’s
`
`shareholders.
`
`25. The FAA’s failure to consider reasonably foreseeable impacts associated with
`
`operating a launch site, and the agency’s consequent uninformed decision, increased the risk of
`
`harm to LCIHA and its shareholders. LCIHA and its shareholders believe that the shortcomings
`
`in the FAA’s review of Spaceport Camden and its decision to issue the License has harmed and
`
`will continue to harm their interests. The FAA’s issuance of the License for Spaceport Camden
`
`and the prospect of unprecedented overflight of residences and people on Little Cumberland
`
`Island have had material negative impacts on LCIHA and its shareholders.
`
`26. Spaceport Camden’s operations, as described in the Final EIS, present conflicts
`
`with LCIHA’s rights and obligations under the 1975 Agreement with the United States.
`
`LCIHA’s shareholders are concerned about the increased risk of fire from a launch failure over
`
`Little Cumberland Island. The LCIHA Board of Directors has determined that it would likely be
`
`impossible to protect the natural environment of Little Cumberland Island and the homes of its
`
`shareholders if a rocket launch failure occurs over the Island. The prospect of rockets being
`
`launched from Spaceport Camden over the Cumberland Island National Seashore has resulted in
`
`a material negative impact on the value of property owned by LCIHA and its shareholders.
`
`LCIHA’s shareholders are concerned that their rights to use and enjoy their properties and the
`
` 
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 10 of 84
`
` 
`
`common property owned by LCIHA will be restricted by requirements that shareholders pre-
`
`register their visits and proceed through law enforcement monitored checkpoints to reach Little
`
`Cumberland Island. The Final EIS indicates that the entirety of Little Cumberland Island and the
`
`surrounding waters would be within hazard areas that will be off-limits to the public, yet the
`
`Applicant has determined that Little Cumberland Island owners and their family members and
`
`guests will be treated differently than the public and subjected to unprecedented risks of being
`
`launched over.
`
`27. LCIHA has sole responsibility for maintenance of the buildings and infrastructure
`
`on the Island, a task made more challenging by the Island’s lack of road access to the mainland,
`
`the limited boat access, and the few motorized vehicles. Wildfires pose a constant and substantial
`
`risk to both the homes and natural resources on the Island. Lightning strikes occasionally trigger
`
`wildfires on the island, and the dense vegetation allows these first to spread quickly. To address
`
`this threat, LCIHA maintains and operates limited fire suppression equipment and tools on the
`
`Island. The equipment available includes two portable water tanks, water spraying backpacks,
`
`rakes, fire flaps and tools to create fire breaks. These water tanks and backpacks are filled from
`
`wells on the island. These fire suppression resources have proven adequate in the past to
`
`extinguish or control fires resulting from the infrequent lightning strikes or other natural sources,
`
`but LCIHA wouldn’t be able to extinguish multi-point fires ignited by launch failures if debris
`
`landed in more than one or two locations. LCIHA’s Board and shareholders are especially
`
`concerned about a launch vehicle causing a catastrophic fire because the palmetto understory
`
`burns hot and fast. The Island is inaccessible two hours before and after each low tide, so
`
`LCIHA’s Board and shareholders are worried that firefighting assistance from the government
`
`would be irreparably delayed.
`
` 
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 11 of 84
`
` 
`
`28. Despite LCIHA raising these concerns about fire to the FAA in its comments to
`
`the Draft EIS and Final EIS, the FAA failed to address these concerns and instead issued the
`
`Record of Decision and the License. The FAA’s issuance of the License over the objections and
`
`concerns of LCIHA has adversely impacted LCIHA and its shareholder property owners.
`
`29. Twice Plaintiff LCIHA undertook the cost and expense of traveling to
`
`Washington, D.C. to meet with staff from the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space
`
`Transportation. These trips were made in an effort to obtain information related to Spaceport
`
`Camden’s safety and potential risks because this information was not contained in the Draft EIS.
`
`30. Harm to LCIHA and its shareholders would be redressed by setting aside the FAA
`
`decisions and the License, and requiring the FAA to undertake a hard look at the impacts of and
`
`feasible alternatives to Spaceport Camden.
`
`31. Plaintiff Caretta Foundation, Inc. (“Caretta Foundation”), is 501(c)(3) non-profit
`
`corporation founded by members of the Little Cumberland Island community to support coastal
`
`research and conservation efforts. Caretta Foundation’s operations are governed by a Board of
`
`Directors charged with carrying out its mission of supporting research and conservation
`
`initiatives that impact coastal resources. Most of Caretta Foundation’s research and conservation
`
`projects have focused on Little Cumberland Island but there is no formal affiliation between
`
`LCIHA and Caretta Foundation.
`
`32.
`
` The Caretta Foundation manages the Little Cumberland Island Sea Turtle Project,
`
`the longest running loggerhead sea turtle research project in the world. Other research projects
`
`operated and managed by the Caretta Foundation include research related to coastal geology,
`
`ornithology, and archeology.
`
` 
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 12 of 84
`
` 
`
`33. Caretta Foundation and its volunteers derive enjoyment from undertaking
`
`research within the Little Cumberland Island’s undisturbed ecosystem, and enjoy the Island’s
`
`aesthetic, ecological, and scientific values. These will all be lessened by the FAA’s License to
`
`operate a launch site at Spaceport Camden.
`
`34. Access restrictions during launches will impair Caretta Foundation’s research.
`
`Caretta Foundation is concerned that shortcomings in the FAA’s review of Spaceport Camden
`
`and its decision to issue the License has harmed and will continue to harm its interests. The Final
`
`EIS describes restrictions on visitation to Little Cumberland Island and Cumberland Island that
`
`will adversely affect researchers’ ability to complete their projects and will threaten their safety
`
`during launch events. Further, Caretta Foundation is concerned that a launch failure will impact
`
`loggerhead sea turtles and shorebirds, and the habitat they rely upon. The Caretta Foundation’s
`
`mission and purpose is put at direct risk because of the FAA’s issuance of the License.
`
`35. Caretta Foundation is concerned about harm to wildlife and habitat caused by the
`
`light towers from operating Spaceport Camden. Turtles are especially sensitive to lights during
`
`nesting season. Caretta Foundation is concerned that the light towers above the forest canopy –
`
`on a site that is currently dark – will interfere with the nesting and viability of turtles.
`
`36. The FAA’s failure to properly analyze how operating Spaceport Camden will
`
`impact Little Cumberland Island and other parts of Cumberland Island National Seashore greatly
`
`impairs Caretta Foundation’s interest in protecting coastal resources.
`
`37. Harm to Caretta Foundation would be redressed by setting aside the FAA’s
`
`decisions and the License, and requiring the FAA to undertake a hard look at the impacts of and
`
`feasible alternatives to Spaceport Camden
`
` 
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 13 of 84
`
` 
`
`38. Collectively, Little Cumberland Island Homes Association, Inc. and Caretta
`
`Foundation, Inc. are referred to herein as “the Homeowner Plaintiffs.”
`
`Defendants
`
`39. Defendant Federal Aviation Administration is an agency of the United States and
`
`is responsible for compliance with federal law for its civil works projects. The FAA’s Office of
`
`Commercial Space Transportation is a branch of the Federal Aviation Administration and is
`
`located at 800 Independence Avenue SW, Room 331, Washington, DC 20591.
`
`40. The FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation’s responsibilities include
`
`licensing commercial space projects, including the License at issue in this suit.
`
`41. Defendant Daniel Murray is the Executive Director of the Office of Operational
`
`Safety in the Office of Commercial Spaceport Transportation. Mr. Murray signed the Record of
`
`Decision and the Final Environmental Impact Statement prepared on behalf of the FAA for
`
`Spaceport Camden. Mr. Murray also signed the Section 106 Programmatic Agreement entered
`
`by the Federal Aviation Administration regarding Spaceport Camden. Mr. Murray’s principal
`
`place of business is 800 Independence Avenue SW, Room 331, Washington, D.C., 20591. Mr.
`
`Murray is sued in his official capacity.
`
`42. Defendant James Repcheck is a Manager in the Safety Authorization Division of
`
`the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation. Mr. Repcheck signed the License on
`
`behalf of the FAA. Mr. Repcheck’s principal place of business is in the FAA’s Office of
`
`Commercial Space Transportation at 800 Independence Avenue SW, Room 331, Washington,
`
`DC 20591. Mr. Repcheck is sued in his official capacity.
`
`43. The FAA and Defendants Murray and Repcheck shall be referred to herein as the
`
`“FAA.”
`
` 
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 14 of 84
`
` 
`
`CUMBERLAND ISLAND NATIONAL SEASHORE AND LITTLE CUMBERLAND
`ISLAND
`
`44. The Spaceport Camden site would be located inland from Cumberland Island.
`
`Cumberland Island is a seventeen-mile-long barrier island on the southern end of the Georgia
`
`coast. The National Seashore’s beach is among the largest undeveloped beaches on the Atlantic
`
`Seaboard. Moving inland, sand dunes line much of the eastern side of the Island. In the center of
`
`the Island, upland areas are covered with thick vegetation including live oak and pine trees with
`
`saw palmetto understory. On its western side, the National Seashore includes large expanses of
`
`coastal marsh, creeks, and shellfish beds. This combination of different, and largely undisturbed,
`
`habitats make the National Seashore home to a variety of rare species including migratory birds
`
`and sea turtles. These same features make the National Seashore an appealing destination and
`
`draw nearly 60,000 visitors to the park every year. The National Seashore an environmental and
`
`recreational treasure.
`
`45. Cumberland Island is not only one of the largest and most ecologically diverse
`
`barrier islands on the Atlantic coast, but also one of the few protected as part of the federal park
`
`system. The National Seashore was created by Congress in 1972 to “provide for public outdoor
`
`recreation use and enjoyment of certain significant shoreline lands and waters of the United
`
`States, and to preserve related scenic, scientific, and historical values.” 16 U.S.C. § 459i. Except
`
`for certain areas reserved for recreation, Congress decreed that “the seashore shall be
`
`permanently preserved in its primitive state.” 16 U.S.C. § 459i-5(b). Congress added additional
`
`protections to portions of Cumberland Island by designating them as part of the Federal
`
`Wilderness Preservation System under the Federal Wilderness Act. Public Law 97-250 (96 Stat.
`
`709) (September 8, 1982) and 16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq. In total, approximately 56% of the upland
`
`and marsh in the National Seashore is designated as wilderness under the Wilderness Act.
`
` 
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 15 of 84
`
` 
`
`46. Cumberland Island National Seashore is managed by the National Park Service as
`
`a unit of the National Park System. The National Seashore includes Little Cumberland Island and
`
`Cumberland Island, and contains over 50 miles of trails and 18 miles of pristine, undeveloped
`
`beaches. Outdoor recreational opportunities include camping, hiking, biking, fishing,
`
`birdwatching, and beachcombing. The National Park Service operates facilities on the island
`
`including the Sea Camp Ranger Station, the Ice House Museum, the Dungeness Ruins, five
`
`campgrounds, the remains of Robert Stafford’s plantation and cemetery, Plum Orchard Mansion,
`
`Cumberland Wharf, the Settlement, and First African Baptist Church.
`
`47. There are no roads or bridges connecting Cumberland Island to the mainland, so
`
`the island is only accessible boat or airplane. Final EIS at 3-38.
`
`48. Cumberland Island includes several historic districts and sites listed in the
`
`National Register of Historic Places. The High Point-Half Moon Bluff Historic District is located
`
`on the northern end of the island, under the proposed rocket flight path and is listed in the
`
`National Register of Historic Places. The High Point-Half Moon Bluff Historic District includes
`
`a variety of wood frame buildings used by African American inhabitants of the Island including
`
`former homes and the First African Baptist Church.
`
`49. The National Park Service prepares a variety of documents to guide its
`
`management of the National Seashore. These include a “foundation document” prepared for
`
`every unit of the national park system, a Fire Management Plan, and a Transportation
`
` 
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 16 of 84
`
` 
`
`Management Plan.1 The National Park Service conducted NEPA review of these documents
`
`before they were adopted.2
`
`50.
`
` Like Cumberland Island, the interior of Little Cumberland Island is composed
`
`primarily of prehistoric sand dune ridges, occasionally interspersed by ephemeral, freshwater
`
`sloughs. Maritime oak and pine forest dominates the tree canopy, and the understory is primarily
`
`saw palmetto. Unlike most other Georgia barrier islands, Little Cumberland Island was never
`
`subjected to intensive agricultural activities (e.g., indigo, rice, or cotton) during its history, thus
`
`contributing to its current, relatively undisturbed, ecology. Little Cumberland Island and
`
`Cumberland Island National Seashore are designated as a United Nations-sanctioned
`
`“International Biosphere Reserve.”
`
`51. Little Cumberland Island and the National Seashore are important waypoints for
`
`migratory birds, including such long-distance migrants as red knots, whimbrels, and long-billed
`
`curlews. Threatened and endangered species that nest on Little Cumberland Island include least
`
`terns, Wilson’s plovers, and occasional American oystercatchers. Migratory shorebird species
`
`that winter on Little Cumberland Island include piping plovers. Little Cumberland Island is
`
`typically home to three nesting pairs of bald eagles. In 2016, Little Cumberland Island was
`
`designated a part of the 100th “Landscape of Hemispheric Importance” for shorebirds by the
`
`Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network and is also recognized as part of an Audubon
`
`Society sanctioned “Important Bird Area.”
`
`52. The Little Cumberland Island Lighthouse was built in 1838 and was maintained
`
`and operated by lighthouse keepers and assistant keepers until 1915. Its purpose was to guide
`
` 
`1 Cumberland Island National Seashore Management Documents. National Park Service
`https://www.nps.gov/cuis/learn/management/cumberland-island-management-documents.htm
`(visited Feb. 3, 2022).
`2 Id. 
`
` 
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 17 of 84
`
` 
`
`ships over the constantly changing St. Andrew’s Sound. LCIHA has done several major
`
`renovation and maintenance projects throughout the years, most recently in 2015. The lighthouse
`
`is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
`
`53.
`
` The map below shows Cumberland Island and Little Cumberland Island and
`
`accurately reflects the boundaries of Cumberland Island National Seashore:
`
`
`
` 
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document 1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 18 of 84
`Case 1:22-cv-01408 Document1 Filed 05/19/22 Page 18 of 84
`
` 
`
`CLINCHSTATEPARK
`
`GEORGIA
`FLORIDA
`
`FORT
`
`
`
` 
`
`18
`
`

`

`C