Documents

There are many documents related to the Santa Susana Field Laboratory, including reports, studies, government publications, expert presentations, and legal documents. We will continue to add important items so check back regularly. Documents are organized into the following categories:

  • Agreements on Consent – Historic DTSC-NASA-DOE agreements on consent
  • SB 990 – Six documents related to the historic state law requiring SSFL to be cleaned up to the highest standards.
  • SSFL Health Studies – Six studies from 1997-2007 about the health effects of SSFL, all of which have findings of great concern.
  • SSFL Contamination – Seven documents detailing the gross radiological and chemical contamination at SSFL.
  • Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board – Three documents related to the LARWQCB’s attempts to hold the Boeing Company accountable for contamination of groundwater from SSFL pollutants.
  • Boeing vs. the State of California – Seven documents related to Boeing’s lawsuit against the State of California (Maziar Movassaghi, Acting Director, California Department of Toxic Substances Control)


DSTC-NASA-DOE Agreements on Consent

  • DOE Agreement
    The agreement with DOE will lead to the cleanup of Area 4, where the 1959 meltdown occurred.
  • NASA Agreement
    The agreement with NASA will lead to the cleanup of Area 2 and part of Area 1, where the space agency conducted a great deal of rocket testing in the 20th century.
SB 990

  • SB 990 one-pager
    January 15, 2008 Cal-EPA fact sheet explaining that day’s historic deal to pass on Superfund listing, stick with SB 990 and repeal the requirement that Kuehl introduce legislation killing her own bill. “CalEPA and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) believe that the State can achieve a faster and higher level of cleanup than USEPA can achieve, and a Superfund listing is probably not needed,” the fact sheet reads. “Recent State actions create an unprecedented opportunity for the State to achieve a comprehensive, protective and expedited cleanup of the SSFL site, with full liability and costs to be assumed by The Boeing Company.”
  • FAQ Santa Susana
    January 15, 2008 Cal-EPA Frequently Asked Questions fact sheet. “The Governor signed SB 990 because he believes very strongly that the SSFL site should be cleaned up to standards that protect the residents in the vicinity of the site,” the fact sheet says. “[A]fter careful consideration, and additional discussions with experts and stakeholders, staff now believes that the clean-up standards outlined in the law are reachable.”
  • Kuehl SSFL 01-15-08
    January 15, 2008 letter from Cal-EPA Secretary Linda Adams relieving SB 990 author and champion State Senator Sheila Kuehl of her commitment to amend the bill.
  • Letter of Intent – 1-14-08
    January 15, 2008 Letter of Intent between stakeholders and California Secretary for Environmental Protection Linda Adams and California Resources Agency Secretary Michael Chrisman over SB 990.
  • Nastri SSFL 01-15-08
    January 15, 2008 letter from Cal-EPA to US EPA declining Superfund status for the Santa Susana Field Laboratory.
  • Summary of LOI Final
    Summary of Non-Binding Letter of Intent. This is what we all signed on to, including Boeing. Now Boeing is suing the State of California over what it gave its word on.
SSFL Health Studies

  • UCLA Rocketdyne Radiation Study – September 1997
    $1.6 million UCLA study to determine the health effects on 4,563 Rocketdyne workers. “All available evidence from this study indicates that occupational exposure to ionizing radiation among nuclear workers at Rocketdyne/AI has increased the risk of dying from cancers,” wrote Dr. Hal Morganstern, director of the UCLA study. “We found the effect of radiation exposure was six to eight times greater in our study than extrapolated from the results of the A-bomb survivors study.”
  • UCLA Rocketdyne Chemical Study – January 1999
    UCLA found that Rocketdyne workers who had high hydrazine exposures were about twice as likely as other Rocketdyne employees who worked at the site to die from lung and other cancers.
  • Report of the Advisory Panel summarizing the worker radiation study
    The primary question the study was designed to answer was whether workers at Rocketdyne/AI’s nuclear sites have experienced excess deaths from cancer associated with their work-related exposures to radiation. The answer is yes.
  • Report of the Advisory Panel Co-chairs summarizing the worker chemical study
    Dozens of different hazardous chemicals were used at various times at the site, but because of resource limitations and problems obtaining access to data regarding chemical exposures, the researchers focused primarily on hydrazines used at rocket-engine test stands.
  • Potential for Offsite Exposures Associated with Santa Susana Field Laboratory
    This February 2006 UCLA research study on potential exposure pathways investigated how contaminants might migrate from the Santa Susana Field laboratory to nearby communities. The study was headed by Dr. Yoram Cohen, Professor of Chemical Engineering and Director of the UCLA Center for Environmental Risk Reduction.
  • Cancer Incidence in the Community Surrounding the Rocketdyne Facility in Southern California
    This March 2007 University of Michigan study was deliberately misconstrued by Boeing, as part of its lawsuit against the State, as having found no elevated incidence of cancer in the community surrounding SSFL. Author Hal Morgenstern corrects this false assertion in a letter to Senator Simitian on April 17, 2007, “Boeing’s assertion that we found no increased cancer rates in the communities surrounding SSFL is false. We did, in fact, find increased incidence rates of certain cancers associated with proximity to the facility, the significance of which would require further research.”
SSFL Contamination

  • SSFL Historical Volume – Area 1 Burn Pit
    1981 Area I Burn Pit Profile done by SSFL Analytical Chemistry’s N. S. Fujikawa. This 65-page report, among other things, shows exactly where this burn pit was: right next to a drainage channel that leads eventually to the Los Angeles River.
  • VCAPCD Permit Emissions Data
    These 1993 to 1994 permit data from the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District show just what kind of chemicals Rocketdyne was allowed to burn up at the lab and how much. Trichloroethylene, monomethylhydrazine, and nitrogen tetraoxide (NTO), all extremely toxic chemicals. NTO used to form a red gaseous cloud upon ignition. Rocketdyne personnel would follow the “BFRC” (Big F*****g Red Cloud) around in a jeep with binoculars to track it – they wanted to confirm it didn’t float into a community below the lab.
  • Two Mile Testing Requirement
    This testing requirement, introduced by Linda Parks, Supervisor of the Second Ventura County District on April 27, 2004 proposed to“[R]equire proposed developments located within a 2-mile radius of a present or former rocket test site to perform soil and water tests for perchlorate and trichloroethylene (TCE), among other contaminants and substances as a part of the Initial Study Assessment phase of CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act). This testing requirement would apply to those projects that go through the normal CEQA review process.”
  • Radioactive Contamination of Water at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory
    This April 2006 report by Committee to Bridge the Gap was presented to the SSFL InterAgency Work Group Community Meeting in Simi Valley. The report zeroes in on radioactive tritium, or “heavy water,” which moves through water faster than any other radionuclide and can’t be filtered out. “Tritium found now at 119,000 pCi/L is SIX times the permissible level and 20,000 times background,” the report says. CBG also shows that gross alpha radiation has impacted 15 groundwater wells, all but one in nuclear-associated Area IV, and that strontium-90 was found leaving Outfall 003 on April 28, 2005 at a concentration over the Maximum Contaminant Level. Outfall 003 drains down into the Brandeis-Bardin Campus at American Jewish University in eastern Simi Valley.
  • Work Plan Phase 2 Groundwater Site Conceptual Model
    The March 2007 “Work Plan Phase 2 Groundwater Site Conceptual Model” by MWH for the Responsible Parties Boeing, NASA and the DOE. “[T]his work plan presents an approach for obtaining field data to be used in evaluating the plume attenuation aspects of the groundwater site conceptual model,” the report reads. “Previous environmental investigations have shown that the Chatsworth formation beneath the SSFL has been impacted by historic releases of various chemicals of potential concern (COPCs) from operational activities. Trichloroethene (TCE) is the compound detected at the highest concentration and with the greatest frequency.”
  • Preliminary Assessment – Site Inspection Report
    This November 30, 2007 U.S. EPA Preliminary Assessment-Site Inspection Report of Rocketdyne is 6.43 MB and 52 pages long and an excellent primer on the pollution problems of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory. “Multiple operations at the SSFL over the last six decades have resulted in the contamination of surface and subsurface environmental media by various hazardous substances,” the report notes. “Extensive use of the most predominant hazardous substance at the site, trichloroethylene (TCE), has impacted the groundwater beneath the site. Several TCE plumes exist at Santa Susana Field Laboratory PA/SI Report 2 throughout the site. Drinking water wells at the site were contaminated with TCE and shut down after workers were exposed to TCE concentrations above Federal and State limits.”
  • DTSC Memo Regarding TCE
    This April 5, 2010 Department of Toxic Substances Control memo to Boeing points out that TCE was first found in wells at Rocketdyne in 1960, not 1984 like other reports suggest. DTSC says that injecting imported water into SSFL groundwater wells, as well as dumping waste water into leach pits, could make the department rethink its conceptualization of the TCE in groundwater at Rocketdyne. Department orders Boeing to take new information and come up with new conclusions in the company’s analysis.
Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board

  • Status Report – September 15, 2009 Interim Source Removal Action (ISRA) Outfalls 008 and 009
    “The confirmation samples from HVS-2B-1 yielded elevated concentrations of lead and copper in the samples submitted for analysis by the Regional Board and in the samples collected by Boeing contractors,” the report says. “In addition to the chemical analysis, thirty six samples were collected and analyzed for radionuclides including cesium-137, strontium-90, tritium, and gamma emitting radionuclides. Eight of the samples yielded elevated concentrations of cesium-137, relative to the background levels of radionuclides in soil.”
  • Letter to LARWQCB regarding proposed Boeing Company Settlement for SSFL
    “We write in opposition to several aspects of the proposed enforcement action regarding more than forty (40) violations by the Boeing Company of its NPDES discharge permit at its highly contaminated former nuclear reactor and rocket testing facility, the Santa Susana Field Laboratory,” RCC allied organizations wrote. “The proposal actually would suspend $300,000 of that fine and permit Boeing to use that money instead to fund a project aimed at assisting it in lobbying the Board to dramatically weaken its permit and markedly increase the pollution it is permitted to release.”
  • June 3, 2010 Committee to Bridge the Gap presentation for the LARWQCB.
    Dan Hirsch showed that exceedances of contaminants had doubled in the last year at Outfalls 008 and 009, which lead down to the Arroyo Simi in Simi Valley, where it used for blended drinking water, and down into the Los Angeles River. These exceedances include high dioxins and gross alpha radiation. The amount of TCDD dioxin at Outfall 008 increased by a hundred times.
Boeing vs. the State of California

  • Boeing Amended Complaint 12-28-2009
    December 28, 2009 Amended Complaint by Boeing asserting that SB 990 is unconstitutional, singles out the company for tough cleanup standards, prevents Congress and the Department of Energy from its objectives and runs afoul of federal jurisdiction over the nuclear part of the old Rocketdyne lab.
  • Motion for Leave to File Brief (Final)
    Applicants the Southern California Federation of Scientists, the Los Angeles
    Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Rocketdyne Cleanup Coalition, and the Committee to Bridge the Gap respectfully ask the Court for to allow the Amicus Brief to be allowed in support of the Defendant, Maziar Movassaghi, Acting Director of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Explained are SCFC, PSR-LA and CBG’s long and active history with the Santa Susana Field Laboratory. These groups have been in the battle to clean up Rocketdyne for decades.
  • Amicus Brief
    March 1, 2010 Amicus Brief in support of DTSC in lawsuit against SB 990 initiated by plaintiff Boeing. Committee to Bridge the Gap, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Los Angeles and the Southern California Federation of Scientists ask that the Court deny Boeing’s Motion for Summary Judgment. “In short, Boeing constructs it’s motion on a substantially incomplete legal and factual picture of the SSFL site. The missing details compel denial of Boeing’s motion.”
  • Exhibits to the Amicus Brief
    The exhibits are a must read for those who want to get an excellent orientation on just what and where the Santa Susana Field Laboratory is.
  • State of California’s opposition to Boeing’s Motion for Summary Judgment
    “As much as Boeing would like to convince the Court otherwise, this case is not about the United States Department of Energy (DOE), or about that agency’s obligations under SB 990. In challenging SB 990, Boeing, a private company and landowner conducting radiological work, inappropriately relies on the rights and defenses of the DOE, a federal agency. While a small portion of the SSFL is owned by the federal government, most of the site is the property of Boeing.”
  • Judge Burrell order transferring venue to LA
    June 18, 2010 decision and order of United States District Judge Garland E. Burrell that case transferred to Central District of California, meaning that the trial will be in Los Angeles instead of Sacramento like Boeing wanted. “Braush declares that a June 9, 2010 internet search found over 100 articles relating to the Santa Susana Field Laboratory in newspapers published in the Central District over an almost four-year period,” Judge Burrell writes in his decision. “In contrast, Brausch declares his ‘search of articles relating to the Santa Susana Field Laboratory in the Sacramento Bee yielded no results whatsoever.’”
  • Court denies, without prejudice to refiling, Boeing’s summary judgment motion