Letters to the editor: NASA shouldn't get rid of Coca stands; lab story was objective
Wrong to destroy Coca stands
Re: your May 7 story, “Leaving Space”:
Why is NASA senselessly destroying the majestic Coca rocket test stands? In the public NASA consulting process, multiple consulting parties suggested the Coca stands are the most historically significant; since both the Apollo and Space Shuttle programs tested engines there, it is the pinnacle of research at the Santa Susana Field Lab.
When it was announced to the consulting parties that NASA would be destroying Coca, NASA did not allow any discussion of consultation alternatives that would avoid demolishing the Coca test stands. This appears to be in direct violation of the National Environmental Policy Act.
Why in the world is NASA preserving the smaller, much less significant Alpha test stands when no consulting party requested preserving Alpha over Coca?
NASA’s recent audit verified that NASA will save multi-millions if they preserve the Coca test stands instead of demolishing them. What in the world is NASA thinking by senselessly destroying its most historical moon legacy as the Coca rocket engine test stands were instrumental in America landing on the moon in 1969?
Mary Wiesbrock, Agoura Hills
Lab story was objective, factual
Re: your May 7 story, “Leaving Space”:
I enjoyed the article. You provided a comprehensive history of it without the emotional reaction that often seemingly accompanies stories about it. Not that those are wrong; it does seem like it’s taking a lot longer to clean it up than it should, but leaving that aside, I felt your article was objective and factual.
John Snyder, Newbury Park
This article originally appeared on Ventura County Star: Letters: NASA shouldn't get rid of Coca; lab story was objective
