{"id":72732,"date":"2013-02-15T16:00:32","date_gmt":"2013-02-15T21:00:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/uncategorized\/nasas-environmental-remediation-efforts-at-the-santa-susana-field-laboratory.php"},"modified":"2013-02-15T16:00:32","modified_gmt":"2013-02-15T21:00:32","slug":"nasas-environmental-remediation-efforts-at-the-santa-susana-field-laboratory","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/nasa\/nasas-environmental-remediation-efforts-at-the-santa-susana-field-laboratory.php","title":{"rendered":"NASA&#39;s Environmental Remediation Efforts at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    NASA Inspector General Paul K. Martin today released a report    questioning the Agency's approach to its planned environmental    cleanup at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory in California.    First opened in 1948, the 2,850 acre facility 30 miles    northwest of Los Angeles was the site of nuclear energy    research by the Department of Energy and rocket testing by the    United States Air Force and NASA. Over the years, these    activities resulted in radiological and chemical contamination    to soil and groundwater at the site.  <\/p>\n<p>    Like all Federal agencies, NASA is required to comply with laws    and regulations that govern cleanup of contaminants left behind    from Agency activities. Generally, responsible parties are    required to conduct risk assessments to evaluate the threat    that contaminants pose to human health, identify the reasonably    foreseeable use of the affected property, and structure their    remediation efforts based on those results.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Boeing Company, which owns and is responsible for the    cleanup of the majority of the Santa Susana site, has publicly    stated that it intends to preserve its portion for use as open    space parkland. This intended use would normally require    remediation to a \"recreational\" level, but Boeing has stated    that it will clean its area to a more stringent \"residential\"    level. The NASA portion of the site is also expected to be used    as parkland.  <\/p>\n<p>    In December 2010, NASA entered into an agreement with    California officials in which it pledged to clean the soil at    the Santa Susana site to its original state before any rocket    testing activities began, known as \"background\" level by 2017.    This Office of Inspector General (OIG) review found that NASA    has committed to an excessive and unnecessarily costly cleanup    of the Santa Susana site. Specifically, the Agency agreed to    clean its portion of the site to a level that exceeds the    generally accepted standard necessary to protect human health    in light of the expected future use of the land.  <\/p>\n<p>    Moreover, although the precise requirements of the cleanup and    therefore its ultimate cost have not been finalized, NASA    estimates that remediation to \"background\" levels could cost    more than $200 million, or more than twice the cost to clean    the site to \"residential\" levels and more than eight times the    cost to clean it to a \"recreational\" use standard. In addition,    because cleanup to background levels may require highly    invasive soil removal, there is a risk that such efforts would    result in significant damage to the surrounding environment as    well as to archeological, historical, and natural resources at    the site.  <\/p>\n<p>    The OIG questioned whether NASA's agreement to clean its    portion of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory to background    levels is the best use of limited NASA funds. Given NASA's    other environmental commitments and the fiscal constraints    facing the Agency and the Nation, the OIG concluded that NASA    can ill afford to spend tens of millions of dollars to clean up    an area beyond its risk level or intended land use.  <\/p>\n<p>    The OIG recommended that NASA reexamine its current plans for    the Santa Susana cleanup and ensure that its remediation effort    is conducted in the most cost-effective manner in keeping with    the intended future use of the property. In its response to the    report, NASA failed to indicate whether it agreed or disagreed    with our recommendation and whether it would reexamine its    current cleanup plans. Instead, the Agency pledged to work    toward a cleanup that achieves \"cost avoidance\" and preserves    cultural and natural resources within the requirements of their    agreement with the State of California. However, the OIG    cautioned that it is not clear that the Agency can achieve the    most appropriate and cost effective remediation effort given    the constraints of the current agreement.  <\/p>\n<p>    The full report can be found on the OIG's website at <a href=\"http:\/\/oig.nasa.gov\/\" rel=\"nofollow\">http:\/\/oig.nasa.gov\/<\/a> under \"Reading    Room\" or at the following link: <a href=\"http:\/\/oig.nasa.gov\/audits\/reports\/FY13\/IG-13-007.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow\">http:\/\/oig.nasa.gov\/audits\/reports\/FY13\/IG-13-007.pdf<\/a>  <\/p>\n<p>    Please contact Renee Juhans at 202-358-1220 if you have    questions.  <\/p>\n<p>    Renee N. Juhans    Executive Officer    NASA Office of Inspector General    (202) 358-1220  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Continued here:<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.spaceref.com\/news\/viewsr.html?pid=43366\" title=\"NASA&#39;s Environmental Remediation Efforts at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory\">NASA&#39;s Environmental Remediation Efforts at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> NASA Inspector General Paul K. Martin today released a report questioning the Agency's approach to its planned environmental cleanup at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory in California.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/nasa\/nasas-environmental-remediation-efforts-at-the-santa-susana-field-laboratory.php\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"limit_modified_date":"","last_modified_date":"","_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-72732","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-nasa"],"modified_by":null,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72732"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=72732"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72732\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=72732"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=72732"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/futurist-transhuman-news-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=72732"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}