 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| Runkle Canyon Documents (click on links and images) |
Michael Collins began investigating Runkle Canyon in 2004, when he first reported high perchlorate reading in its
groundwater for a Los Angeles CityBeat cover story "Two Mile Island." Since then, he and EnviroReporter.com have
gathered thousands of pages of data from hundreds of documents.
One notable aspect of this investigation has been the inability of some government officials, especially in Simi Valley, and
our media counterparts, especially in Ventura County, to digest and understand this information. Hopefully, this page will
help them and our readers to understand this oft-times complex and confusing issue. The devil is in the details and the
details of this issue are many.
In addition to our Runkle Canyon Investigation and Gallery, we present these documents, maps and articles from the
most current to the oldest in descending order. Some entries are detailed on this page while others are simply listed
because their importance is self-described.
groundwater for a Los Angeles CityBeat cover story "Two Mile Island." Since then, he and EnviroReporter.com have
gathered thousands of pages of data from hundreds of documents.
One notable aspect of this investigation has been the inability of some government officials, especially in Simi Valley, and
our media counterparts, especially in Ventura County, to digest and understand this information. Hopefully, this page will
help them and our readers to understand this oft-times complex and confusing issue. The devil is in the details and the
details of this issue are many.
In addition to our Runkle Canyon Investigation and Gallery, we present these documents, maps and articles from the
most current to the oldest in descending order. Some entries are detailed on this page while others are simply listed
because their importance is self-described.
Runkle Canyon, LLC is homebuilding giant
KB Homes' company that wants to build in
this canyon south of Simi Valley (left here).
Runkle's dirt road leads to Rocketdyne in the
upper right corner of this aerial photograph.
KB Homes' company that wants to build in
this canyon south of Simi Valley (left here).
Runkle's dirt road leads to Rocketdyne in the
upper right corner of this aerial photograph.
| The Radiation Rangers (left to right): Frank Serafine, Patty Coryell, Rev. John Southwick and Terry Matheney. |
461 residences are slated to be built in
Runkle Canyon, provided that California's
Department of Toxic Substances Control
signs off on the plan. DTSC officially began
its oversight of the project on April 22, 2008.
Runkle Canyon, provided that California's
Department of Toxic Substances Control
signs off on the plan. DTSC officially began
its oversight of the project on April 22, 2008.
April 23, 2008: KB Homes' Runkle Canyon, LLC enters into a voluntary cleanup agreement with the Department of Toxic
Substances Control called "Standard Agreement for participating under California's Land Reuse and Revitalization Act
(CLRRA) Program."
April 23, 2008: The DTSC/KB Homes agreement includes the Project Vicinity Map and Draft Cost Estimate Worksheet.
April 18, 2008: KB Homes' Runkle Canyon application to apply for the California Environmental Protection Agency's
"California's Land Reuse and Revitalization Act (CLRRA)." Instead of applying as a "Contiguous property owner" in lieu of
Runkle Canyon's border with the Santa Susana Field Laboratory, KB Homes registers as an "Innocent Landowner."
January 10, 2008: Southwick receives Environmental Inc's laboratory techniques for detecting strontium-90. To his and
reporter Collins' surprise, the techniques are from 1967 by a federal agency that is no longer in existence.
January 10, 2008: Simi Valley's assistant city manager Laura Behjan sends a letter explaining Dade Moeller's activities
and confirming that the outdated Environmental Inc. laboratory techniques were the same ones that had been used to
test the Runkle Canyon soil samples.
January 7, 2008: Radiation Ranger Rev. John Southwick questions how both Dade Moeller and the city's lab,
Environmental Inc. Midwest Laboratory, could have come up with such low results for strontium-90 in Runkle's soil.
Southwick demands explanation of suspect strontium-90 readings.
December 27, 2007: Simi Valley's Laura Behjan sends Rev. Southwick the Environmental Inc. report on the ten "split
samples" that the city took to cross check Dade Moeller's results. They also read only a quarter of typical background.
December 18, 2007: Dade Moeller radiological report on 63 soil samples from Runkle Canyon tested for strontium-90.
Test results are so low that they average a quarter of normal background for strontium-90 in area.
December 13, 2007: Boeing submits Offsite Data Evaluation Report for the Santa Susana Field Laboratory to DTSC that
includes evidence that toxic trichloroethylene (TCE) had been detected in Runkle Canyon groundwater as we reported in
January.
The entire 199 page report says on page 1-18 (p. 37 in the pdf) that "Runkle Canyon and the SFFL do not share a
common property boundary," though maps in the document show that it clearly does. The document goes on to say "No
environmental investigations have been performed by Boeing, NASA, or DOE on the Runkle Canyon property," yet the
map showing the TCE readings in Runkle Canyon groundwater is on page 184. Perhaps ironically, the last page of this
report combines the two falsehoods, showing the groundwater sampling spot on Runkle Canyon and the common
Rocketdyne border and says, in conclusion, "Offsite sampling sufficient with no data gaps."
November 8, 2007: Department of Toxic Substances Control's Norm Riley's letter to Simi Valley city manager Mike Sedell
explains that DTSC is investigating "the possibility of chemical and/or radioactive contamination from the Santa Susana
Field Laboratory (SSFL) occurring on properties outside the boundaries of that facility."
November 8, 2007: DTSC's Norm Riley's letter to KB Homes and to the developer of Woolsey Canyon on the east side of
the former Rocketdyne lab in the hills above the San Fernando Valley. Riley "strongly encourages" developers to discuss
pollution findings by the Radiation Rangers, and others, and to seek "DTSC's assistance in the review of sampling and
analysis plans prior to performing any additional work that may be planned."
October 30, 2007: Larry Walker Associates' Tetra Tech analysis for Simi Valley deems Runkle Canyon safe. "None of the
surface waters in the Simi Valley area," the analysis says, "are designated as having a [Municipal and Domestic Supply]
beneficial use. Therefore, the State drinking water standards do not apply to Runkle Canyon or downstream surface
waters." However, the very Tetra Tech report it was supposed to analyze says "Potential human consumption of surface
water is reasonably possible under the Municipal and Domestic Supply, Water Contact Recreation, and Non-contact
Water Recreation beneficial use scenarios. In these types of situations, water quality criteria, such as the MCLs, PRGs,
PHGs, and NLs, may be used as screening values to determine whether further evaluation of surface water may need to
be considered."
September 20, 2007: Simi Valley letter to Larry Walker Associates asks for "expert opinion" on its Tetra Tech report. "Do
the test results indicate that contact with the water and/or soil presents a risk to the public," the letter asks. "Is there any
action the City is obligated to take (e.g., reporting to regulatory agencies) in view of the test results[?]"
August 20, 2007: EnviroReporter.com's Tetra Tech report analysis highlights important passages of reports and its
mistakes.
August 14, 2007: The city of Simi Valley's Tetra Tech report gives contradictory signals on the safety of Runkle Canyon.
While getting many key facts wrong, the 88-page document recommends further and more expansive testing.
June 29, 2007: In a meeting of the Mountains Recreation & Conservation Authority (MCRA) discussing "Proposition 84 -
Project Planning and Design," Runkle Canyon is listed under "Acquisition and restoration in the Arroyo Simi watershed:
Runkle Canyon - Accept pending dedications."
June 6, 2007: A project budget exhibit entitled "Project Planning and Design - Proposition 40" also has Runkle Canyon
listed as "Accept pending dedication" under a section called "Land acquisition and restoration in the following canyons
and sub-areas of the Simi Hills."
Substances Control called "Standard Agreement for participating under California's Land Reuse and Revitalization Act
(CLRRA) Program."
April 23, 2008: The DTSC/KB Homes agreement includes the Project Vicinity Map and Draft Cost Estimate Worksheet.
April 18, 2008: KB Homes' Runkle Canyon application to apply for the California Environmental Protection Agency's
"California's Land Reuse and Revitalization Act (CLRRA)." Instead of applying as a "Contiguous property owner" in lieu of
Runkle Canyon's border with the Santa Susana Field Laboratory, KB Homes registers as an "Innocent Landowner."
January 10, 2008: Southwick receives Environmental Inc's laboratory techniques for detecting strontium-90. To his and
reporter Collins' surprise, the techniques are from 1967 by a federal agency that is no longer in existence.
January 10, 2008: Simi Valley's assistant city manager Laura Behjan sends a letter explaining Dade Moeller's activities
and confirming that the outdated Environmental Inc. laboratory techniques were the same ones that had been used to
test the Runkle Canyon soil samples.
January 7, 2008: Radiation Ranger Rev. John Southwick questions how both Dade Moeller and the city's lab,
Environmental Inc. Midwest Laboratory, could have come up with such low results for strontium-90 in Runkle's soil.
Southwick demands explanation of suspect strontium-90 readings.
December 27, 2007: Simi Valley's Laura Behjan sends Rev. Southwick the Environmental Inc. report on the ten "split
samples" that the city took to cross check Dade Moeller's results. They also read only a quarter of typical background.
December 18, 2007: Dade Moeller radiological report on 63 soil samples from Runkle Canyon tested for strontium-90.
Test results are so low that they average a quarter of normal background for strontium-90 in area.
December 13, 2007: Boeing submits Offsite Data Evaluation Report for the Santa Susana Field Laboratory to DTSC that
includes evidence that toxic trichloroethylene (TCE) had been detected in Runkle Canyon groundwater as we reported in
January.
The entire 199 page report says on page 1-18 (p. 37 in the pdf) that "Runkle Canyon and the SFFL do not share a
common property boundary," though maps in the document show that it clearly does. The document goes on to say "No
environmental investigations have been performed by Boeing, NASA, or DOE on the Runkle Canyon property," yet the
map showing the TCE readings in Runkle Canyon groundwater is on page 184. Perhaps ironically, the last page of this
report combines the two falsehoods, showing the groundwater sampling spot on Runkle Canyon and the common
Rocketdyne border and says, in conclusion, "Offsite sampling sufficient with no data gaps."
November 8, 2007: Department of Toxic Substances Control's Norm Riley's letter to Simi Valley city manager Mike Sedell
explains that DTSC is investigating "the possibility of chemical and/or radioactive contamination from the Santa Susana
Field Laboratory (SSFL) occurring on properties outside the boundaries of that facility."
November 8, 2007: DTSC's Norm Riley's letter to KB Homes and to the developer of Woolsey Canyon on the east side of
the former Rocketdyne lab in the hills above the San Fernando Valley. Riley "strongly encourages" developers to discuss
pollution findings by the Radiation Rangers, and others, and to seek "DTSC's assistance in the review of sampling and
analysis plans prior to performing any additional work that may be planned."
October 30, 2007: Larry Walker Associates' Tetra Tech analysis for Simi Valley deems Runkle Canyon safe. "None of the
surface waters in the Simi Valley area," the analysis says, "are designated as having a [Municipal and Domestic Supply]
beneficial use. Therefore, the State drinking water standards do not apply to Runkle Canyon or downstream surface
waters." However, the very Tetra Tech report it was supposed to analyze says "Potential human consumption of surface
water is reasonably possible under the Municipal and Domestic Supply, Water Contact Recreation, and Non-contact
Water Recreation beneficial use scenarios. In these types of situations, water quality criteria, such as the MCLs, PRGs,
PHGs, and NLs, may be used as screening values to determine whether further evaluation of surface water may need to
be considered."
September 20, 2007: Simi Valley letter to Larry Walker Associates asks for "expert opinion" on its Tetra Tech report. "Do
the test results indicate that contact with the water and/or soil presents a risk to the public," the letter asks. "Is there any
action the City is obligated to take (e.g., reporting to regulatory agencies) in view of the test results[?]"
August 20, 2007: EnviroReporter.com's Tetra Tech report analysis highlights important passages of reports and its
mistakes.
August 14, 2007: The city of Simi Valley's Tetra Tech report gives contradictory signals on the safety of Runkle Canyon.
While getting many key facts wrong, the 88-page document recommends further and more expansive testing.
June 29, 2007: In a meeting of the Mountains Recreation & Conservation Authority (MCRA) discussing "Proposition 84 -
Project Planning and Design," Runkle Canyon is listed under "Acquisition and restoration in the Arroyo Simi watershed:
Runkle Canyon - Accept pending dedications."
June 6, 2007: A project budget exhibit entitled "Project Planning and Design - Proposition 40" also has Runkle Canyon
listed as "Accept pending dedication" under a section called "Land acquisition and restoration in the following canyons
and sub-areas of the Simi Hills."
| This page is currently being developed |
