EPA, DTSC reject request to review Runkle Canyon data
City still doesn't have its questions answered
By Kyle Jorrey kjorrey@theacorn.com

The city's efforts to have a trio of government agencies independently review scientific data related to Runkle Canyon have so far produced very limited results.

Only one of the three agencies contacted by city staff in October- the state's Department of Health Services- agreed to the city's request, while the other two, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control and the United States Environmental Protection Agency, politely replied no.

Assistant city manager Laura Behjan put a positive spin on the two rejections.

"I'd say we've been working most closely with the Department of Health Services," Behjan said. "They seemed to be most in a position to provide some input."

The city manager's office originally sent out letters requesting that the agencies conduct a review of data and reports related to the "potential or actual presence of strontium-90 in Runkle Canyon," including environmental impact report documents as well as data referenced by the community during council meetings on Aug. 21 and Sept. 25 last year.

Strontium-90 is a radioactive isotope that has been linked to bone cancer, cancer of the soft tissue near the bone and leukemia. It was first detected slightly above natural levels on the Runkle Ranch property in 1999 by Phoenix-based QST Environmental, who was hired by previous Runkle Canyon developer Greenpark LLC.

With grading in Runkle Canyon put on hold by builders KB Homes and Lennar Homes, city manager Mike Sedell stressed in the letters that "time is of the essence."

KB and Lennar have approval from the city to build 461 upscale residences on the 1,500-acre property located along the southern border of Simi Valley.

The Department of Toxic Substances Control, no stranger to the area in question, was brief in its denial of the city's request.

In a letter to Sedell dated Nov. 6, DTSC professional engineer James Pappas stated that a member of his staff had spoken with John Beach of the USEPA and Gary Butner, acting chief of the Department of Health Services.

After learning that those two agencies would be assisting the city, the DTSC, which has been overseeing Boeing's cleanup of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory's Area I burn pit, decided to pass on the request.

"We were told by both the USEPA and the DHS/RHB that they would be providing assistance to you in this matter," the letter read. "At this time we feel it best if you work with the USEPA and DHS/RHB since both agencies have experts in the field."

In contrast to what was reported in the letter, however, the USEPA also declined the city's request.

"The review and conclusions you are requesting require extensive time and resource commitments," wrote John Beach, EPA environmental scientist.

"USEPA's role is limited because we do not have an oversight or regulatory role at SSFL. Resources that once supported SSFL activities have since been redirected to matters where we do have direct authority," the letter continued.

Beach did include a table comparing reported strontium90 levels from 126 soil samples taken at Runkle Canyon to the agency's Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs).

"Based on EPA's PRG of 0.23 picocuries per gram for Sr90 in residential soil, all of the Sr-90 measurements reported in that table appear to fall within or below our 'protective cancer risk range,'" wrote Beach, who included the disclaimer, "PRGs are useful but limited tools for supporting riskbased decisionmaking."

The city finally got some of the answers it was looking for from the Department of Health Services, which took the time to evaluate whether or not airborne strontium90 could become a health and safety threat "during grading or other activities associated with the site development."

"They took a look at the issue of airborne strontium that could be created when the site is graded," Behjan said.

That report concluded that the planned Runkle Canyon site development activities do not pose significant health and safety risk to nearby residents or to site workers from the radioactive isotope.

But what the DHS did not do was look at the data referenced by residents and contained on the website enviroreporter.com, Behjan said, because they felt the city was asking for too broad a review.

"They are asking for something more specific. So at this point in time we are looking to what we can do to get something a little more focused, to get the information that the residents have been calling for," Behjan said.

Behjan said her office would report back to the public once it gets those answers. Until then, no grading will take place at Runkle Canyon unless KB and Lennar decide to break the agreement they made with the city to delay all further construction until the council gets its desired answers.

"Our residents have asked questions, and we have a responsibility to do what we can to get those questions answered," Behjan said.

The above replies and reports can be found through a "Runkle Canyon update" link on the city's homepage, www.simivalley.org.