Home › News › Local News
Boeing may be fined for water runoff violations
Download this story as a podcast!
STORY TOOLS 
More from Local NewsBoeing Co., which owns the Santa Susana Field Laboratory, is facing a proposed $471,190 fine for violating permits limiting the contaminants in water running off the property in the hills south of Simi Valley.
The fine was recommended by the staff of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board in response to Boeing racking up 79 violations of the California Water Code during an 18-month period.
The board is expected to decide whether the fine should be levied at a meeting in October. If it does impose a monetary punishment, Boeing Co. has 90 days to appeal the decision.
The aerospace company purchased the former rocket engine and nuclear test site in 1996. The 2,800-acre field laboratory has been the site of a massive cleanup effort for more than a decade.
From October 2004 to January 2006, wastewater and stormwater runoff coming from the lab had increased levels of chromium, dioxin, lead, mercury and other pollutants. The contaminated water flowed into Bell Creek and the Los Angeles River, according to a statement issued by the regional water board.
The runoff violated a permit issued by the board on July 1, 2004, that allowed the lab to release wastewater and stormwater runoff as long as it didn't contain high levels of pollutants.
A Boeing Co. spokeswoman said the company is evaluating the proposed fine.
Deborah Smith, interim executive officer of the board, said in a statement that federal and state clean water laws must be "carefully followed and rigorously enforced" to protect the environment and human health.
Dan Hirsch, co-founder of the watchdog group Committee to Bridge the Gap, applauded the proposed fine but suggested it would be a slap on the wrist for the company.
"On the one hand, it's a stunning indictment of Boeing's gross disregard for environmental laws," Hirsch said. "On the other hand, it's about an hour's worth of Boeing's annual income."
Posted by Ventura22 on July 26, 2007 at 7:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Good. They should be paying for a hell of a lot more than that. Why do the taxpayers have to foot the bill for a superfund site?? Let me get this straight; they knowingly purchase a problem site, then get in over their heads and the taxpayers end-up footing the bill...because they company made a bad decision and can't make any profits? Sounds like the idiots that bought the Haalaco site in Oxnard.
Posted by brian_williams on July 26, 2007 at 4:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It's a superfund site because we taxpayers wanted to go to the moon, have best satellites, ICMB's and fast jets. Yet we did not want to pay the full price of those activities. So we turned a blind eye knowing full well what was going on back then.
We are all equal in blame. We wanted the technology and all the wonders it brings to our life. Good thing we now get our goodies from China and India and pollute the crap out of their environment. But the future generation of Chinese and Indians will probably sue the USA in the world court and win.
(Requires free registration.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.