Governor's decision on field lab leaves many questions unanswered

While on extended vacation in Sacramento last week, I viewed a copy of your paper online. I must congratulate and applaud the coverage of the future agreement posed for the Boeing-Rocketdyne site. I read the L.A. Times and the L.A. Daily News and concluded that your coverage surpassed both.

Boeing-Rocketdyne is one of the most complex environmentally polluted sites in the state. Currently, the multitude of environmental regulators is so long that, while sitting and watching their presentations, one often forgets which agency or department they represent.

The list includes the usual suspects- federal EPA, state Regional Water, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Department of Health- and the special players- U.S. Energy Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Agency and NASA.

Your reporter's coverage included details the other papers missed. Only your paper reported the legislation- part of the governor's agreement- planned for next year's session to create a Joint Powers Authority that will receive $750,000 dollars a year for 30 years to "set boundaries of the park and maintain the site."

As in all good journalistic endeavors, the article also raises questions:

How many acres of the site will be designated as park area?

Who will determine if the cleanup levels are health protective in the park area?

And will the DTSC conduct five-year assessments as it does at other "capped" hazardous waste sites?

What will the newly formed state Joint Powers Authority do with the $750,000 a year for 30 years? Do other state park Joint Powers authorities have the responsibility of maintaining hazardous waste sites for 30 years? Do the environmental regulators, scientists, health professionals and, most importantly, community members have to join?

Will the new organization seek contributions like the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy?

If Boeing goes bankrupt, who will pay the $750,000 per year?

And, more importantly, who will ensure that the park site remains safe?

If the property is turned into a state park, does that mean that California taxpayers will be responsible for the safety of the park and for the payments due to the state park Joint Powers Authority?

Dan Hirsch was right; this deal smells of tent canvas and cigar smoke.

Once again, I commend you and your staff for a job well done. Ron Baker Sacramento