Comment from Diane Teter
Diane TeterOpposeIndividual
Summary: The commenter, representing local residents, opposes the proposed expansion of Starship test-flight trajectories and splashdown zones. They argue that recent tests have already caused significant physical disruptions, such as tremors and sonic booms, and demand that the FAA reject the expansion until meaningful safeguards for the community are established.
The recent static‑fire tests of the Super Heavy booster at Boca Chica were not minor events. They produced tremors strong enough to rattle homes across the Lower Rio Grande Valley and generated sonic booms that carried for miles. Residents felt the shockwaves in their floors, windows, and walls. These are not abstract “operational impacts”—they are lived, physical disruptions to people who never consented to bear them.
Now, under the proposed action, the FAA would modify SpaceX’s vehicle operator license to authorize expanded test‑flight trajectories and new splashdown zones. The Starship splashdown zone for recent flights has already been the Indian Ocean near Australia. The proposal goes further: expanding the previously evaluated Hawaii and Central Pacific Landing Area, enlarging the Southeast Pacific Region Landing Area, adding a Northern Pacific Contingency Landing Area, and even authorizing temporary airspace closures for an additional Starship reentry trajectory back to Boca Chica.
Each expansion increases the frequency and scale of high‑energy events that South Texas communities will be forced to absorb. NASA and SpaceX may seek more testing, but the FAA’s responsibility is to protect the public. These tremors and booms are clear evidence that current impacts are already excessive.
The FAA should reject this expansion until meaningful safeguards for local residents are in place