Cleanup PROCESS

SSFL > CLEANUP > CLEANUP PROCESS

Dig and move

The only effective cleanup method that currently exists for the Santa Susana Field Lab is to remove the contaminated soil to a controlled location.

The SSFL’s contamination is “fallout” as a result of decades of leaks, spills, explosions, fires, and illegal waste management practices. The +300 Contaminants of Concern at the SSFL are loose in the soil and groundwater, making them highly mobile. The SSFL contamination pollutes the water, environment, wildlife, and people, not only near the site, but due to the long-lasting nature of much of the SSFL contamination, it puts all of SoCal at risk.

Alternative cleanup methods have been determined to be ineffective for the SSFL:

  • Leaving the contamination on-site will allow it to migrate into the community, where it can cause significant harm.

  • A concrete cap would not protect the site’s groundwater.

  • In-situ remediation and/or natural attenuation will take decades or even centuries to remediate the dangerous contamination.

Safest, Smartest, Most Comprehensive Cleanup Possible

With the Responsible Parties claiming to have some of the most advanced technology in the world, it’s no wonder we expect them to do the cleanup right.

We want the safest, smartest, most comprehensive cleanup possible. We know it can be done. We understand that it will cost the Responsible Parties more money to do it right, but we believe they should be held accountable for protecting us and our environment. We believe they should put people over profits. Every time.

SMARTEST: The Responsible Parties have repeatedly claimed they must use the most archaic methods, the most inaccurate detection tools, and the most clumsy operators and the dirtiest trucks in order to do the complete cleanup. None of this is true. PASSFL is advocating for:

  • Better testing methodologies to ensure only polluted soil is removed, resulting in less soil being removed overall.

  • On-site remediation of soil where possible.

  • Smarter methods to carefully remove soil from sensitive areas, such as using smaller tools and equipment.

  • Utilizing technology to improve transparency and trust, such as public, real-time air quality data and onsite cameras.

SAFEST: If the cleanup is performed in accordance with local, state, and federal laws, the cleanup will be safe. Mitigation Measures and Standard Operating Procedures prevent contamination from becoming airborne and protect biological and cultural resources at the site. PASSFL continues to advocate for “gold standard” cleanup methods such as:

  • Construction tents, such as those used at other toxic sites during cleanup over areas being actively remediated to prevent fugitive dust.

  • Improved soil testing and classification methods to guarantee that dangerous soil isn’t sent to unlicensed sites.

  • Covered conveyor belts instead of trucks to move the polluted soil as much as possible.

  • Independent Site Monitors to review that mitigation measures and Operating Procedures are being applied properly.

COMPREHENSIVE: Boeing, NASA, and the Department of Energy have made it clear that they’d rather save money than do a complete cleanup of the site. Without a doubt, their plans to cut corners will harm our water, environment, wildlife, and people. PASSFL is advocating for:

  • The original cleanup agreements for a “background” cleanup to remove all man-made contamination and return the site to it’s natural condition.

  • Biological and Cultural Exemptions must be kept to the original intent to protect, instead of being used as loopholes to get out of the complete cleanup of the site.

  • The cleanup modeling and calculations should result in the most comprehensive cleanup, in accordance with the 2015 SRAM.

Waste is an Environmental Justice Issues

There is a fundamental problem with the toxic and radioactive waste — how do you properly dispose of dangerous waste in a responsible way?

There are only two licensed toxic waste sites in California, and only a few low-level radioactive waste sites in the US. These licensed waste sites were constructed for the storage of toxic and/or radioactive waste and are closely monitored, given the risks associated with the materials they contain. They are built away from communities, aquifers, and environmentally sensitive areas.

Taking toxic and/or radioactive waste to unlicensed sites is cheaper but also more dangerous. From medical to municipal waste sites, these dumps were not built with proper liners and are not monitored as closely.

Residents and NGOs have fought to keep the SSFL’s toxic and radioactive waste out of unlicensed waste sites, even when it resulted in a slower cleanup of the site. NGOs such as the Committee to Bridge the Gap and Physicians for Social Responsibility - Los Angeles have sued to stop the dangerous dumping of SSFL waste.

We know that the toxic and radioactive waste that’s loose in the soil and groundwater at the SSFL can’t stay onsite. It’s migrating off-site, polluting the water and environment, and harming wildlife and residents. Alternatives to a complete cleanup, such as a concrete cap, have been determined to be ineffectual.

Although there’s no perfect solution for toxic or radioactive waste, we believe the Responsible Parties must be held to the highest standards for responsible waste management.

RELATED

TRANSPORTATION STUDY