NASA's administrator between 1961 and 1968 was involved in the notorious "Lavender Scare" and his name became the subject of controversy when it was revealed. In the late 1940s and early 50s, thousands of people were removed from their positions due to allegations of homosexuality. NASA Administrator Bill Nelson asked NASA's Chief Historian to investigate the matter.
The final report was titled " NASA Historical Investigation into James E. Webb's Relationship to the Lavender Scare" NASA claimed that their investigation found no evidence of a leader of the policy, so they wouldn't be changing the name. NASA may change its naming policy. Administrator Nelson agreed that the policy needs to be reexamined.
The AAS Board of Trustees wanted to give a brief update on the response of NASA to the name of the project. Administrator Nelson replied that NASA's acting chief historian as well as a contract historian were looking at records and that the findings would be made public after the fact. Nelson agreed that the mission naming policy for NASA needs to be reexamined. We're waiting for the results.
The JWST got its name from the beginning. The scientific community objected to the naming because it deviated from tradition. Sean O'Keefe was the former NASA Administrator and named the observatory after him. O'Keefe chose a name that had no impact on the observatory's mission.
The decision not to change the observatory's name met with anger and disappointment from the LGBTQI+ community. A professor of astronomy and astrophysics at Penn State is a member of the Sexual and Gender Minority Alliance, a committee that advises the American Astronomical Society on issues related to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer community. Wright was the leader of the effort to learn more about NASA's investigation. On his website, Wright stated that.
“At this point, NASA’s resistance has gone from stubbornness to recalcitrance. Already, NASA employees are refusing to use the name in prominent publications. The Royal Astronomical Society says it expects authors of MNRAS not to use the name. The American Astronomical Society has twice asked the administrator to reopen the naming process (and received no response!). This is an error that only grows as NASA refuses to fix it.“
There is a reminder about the policy regarding their scientific journals in the ASS statement. It is unclear if the AAS is representative of any actual plans or if it was just lip service from the Administrator. The administration's refusal to change the name of the JWST, along with their willingness to revisit their naming policies, sends a mixed message.
NASA has a specific policy regarding the naming of probes and missions that have been in place since the 1960's. The Ad Hoc Committee to name space projects and objects was founded in 1960. The committee said that the flight names should reflect the series of which they were a part.
The project designation committee adopted the "Cortright" system in 1961. NASA management instruction 4-3-1
“Each project name will be a simple euphonic word that will not duplicate or be confused with other NASA or non-NASA project titles. When possible and if appropriate, names will be chosen to reflect NASA’s mission. Project names will be serialized when appropriate, thus limiting the number of different names in use at any one time; however, serialization will be used only after successful flight or accomplishment has been achieved.”
NASA Policy Directive 7620.1I made a few minor changes to their naming procedure. It is the responsibility of NASA administrators and assistant administrators to name missions.
“Initiate the name selection process by assembling an ad hoc name selection team consisting of one member representing the office in which a project name is under consideration, e.g., Science Mission Directorate, and one member representing every other NASA Headquarters office participating in the management of a significant element of or having other major involvement in the project. This will include the Public Affairs Officer co-located in the NASA Headquarters program office initiating the name selection process. The Official-in-Charge will lead the team or designate a leader.”
The ad-hoc special project name team needs to get suggestions from NASA Centers and contractors. They must make recommendations to the Associate Administrator for the Office of Communications after they have finished deliberations. The A.A. for the Office of Communications must review the recommendations of the special committee, make a selection, and submit it to the Administrator for final approval.
Informal implementation of this process is common. Bill Barry is a former NASA chief historian.
The official-in- charge of the appropriate NASA headquarters office is responsible for identifying missions that need a name and assembling a committee to recommend names. The official in charge of that committee has the final say on how that committee works. Most of the proposals come with a name that the principal investigator chooses.
The name selection for the JWST was not followed. The name was chosen without going through the usual channels by the former NASA administrator. The naming procedures were not followed so a review of them would seem redundant. It's not clear why a review of the naming process is needed if NASA wants to keep the name.
It could be little more than lip service. There will be time to tell.
There is further reading on AAS.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
