Home › News › County News
Family connects man's death to Field Lab, blames county
The family of a Los Angeles County man who lived near the Santa Susana Field Laboratory and died last year of cancer has filed two wrongful death claims, totaling $6 million, against the county of Ventura.
A third claim, seeking "in excess of $50,000," was also filed last month.
All three claims were denied by the county's Risk Management Office. The denial paves the way for the family to file suit.
The claims mark the first time, in officials' and observers' memories, that a complaint has alleged the county is responsible for an illness potentially linked to contamination at the former rocket engine and nuclear test site in the hills south of Simi Valley.
"There have been suits in the past by residents asserting that the Field Lab was responsible for their health problems," said Dan Hirsch, co-founder of the nuclear watchdog group Committee to Bridge the Gap. "This is the first I've ever heard of a complaint against any of the counties with regards to the Field Lab."
Chuck Pode, the county's risk manager and deputy executive officer, said he and his staff were not aware of any similar claims.
Glenn Carey, 49, lived in Dayton Canyon, near the lab on the Los Angeles County side of the hill, for more than 30 years, according to the claims.
In May 2006, Carey was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. He died in November.
The Dayton Canyon man worked "as an independent contractor in the area of, and as a possible agent for," the Field Lab, according to the claims, which describe his work as repairing bridges, regrading dirt roadways, maintaining horse trails and providing access to the fire department "up the back ways to the Field Lab."
Carey "drank the well water, worked the land full of toxic dust and fallout, and breathed the night air while sleeping as the owners at the Santa Susana Field Lab burned nearly 200 different varieties of toxic/nuclear wastes," the claims state.
The county rejected the claims because "it's not county property," Pode said of the lab.
But the documents filed with the county by Carey's family members claim that "the governmental entity in question negligently, carelessly, recklessly and wantonly owned, controlled, managed and maintained the Santa Susana Field Lab, which was the direct cause of Glenn Carey's unexpected death."
The documents go on to say the governmental entities breached a duty to exercise ordinary care in the use, maintenance or management of the lab.
Jamaal Buchanan, a law clerk with The Cochran Firm, which is representing the family members, declined to comment on the claims because "we're still conducting an investigation at this point."
The two wrongful death claims were filed by Carey's son Nicholas and Lisa Carey, acting as guardian for Carey's other son, who is a minor. Both of those claims sought $3 million each.
The third claim was filed by Carey's mother, Jeanne, and seeks an amount in the excess of $50,000 and within unlimited jurisdiction of the Superior Court of California.
The claim states that Jeanne Carey owns land where Glenn lived and worked, and she questions the condition and material value of her property.
The claim then goes on to contend that Ventura County failed to warn her of any potential contamination that has affected her land through fraudulent and negligent misrepresentations and through negligent or intentional interference with prospective economic advantage.
"The complaint as filed is puzzling in that Mr. Carey did not reside in Ventura County," Hirsch said. "And Ventura County government doesn't own, operate or manage the Santa Susana Field Laboratory as suggested in the complaint."
Posted by Ventura22 on June 11, 2007 at 8:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Doesn't that lab fall under federal jurisdiction, not county government? They were operating under DOD specific authority for many years, NOT Ventura County regulations. That's how it was back then; the feds came in, set-up camp and did (or had done by a private contractor)) whatever they wanted, then scurried away when it was all over, leaving the defense contractor and local governments to deal with the fallout. Then, the contractors disappeared or played dumb.
That's like trying to hold the county responsible for something that the Navy did at Port Hueneme on the federal side of the fence it the base closed and the locals discovered bad stuff there. The county had no control or jurisdiction over what they did on top of that hill during the 40's, 50's and 60's. We were at the height of world war 2 and the onset of the cold war when they were testing the bad stuff there. That's when the feds did whatever they wanted and had free reign because nobody could interfere with them, conbsidering the events taking place in the world at the time.
By no means is this right that the site was left the way it was. The federal govt (dept of defense, NASA) should be assuming the blame for this mess, not the state and local agencies who are now fighting to get it taken care of. The site should have been left as it was found when they first set-up camp there. The problem lies with the fact that a defense contractor(who bid the lowest) got the job, and they cut every corner back in those days to stay within their budget; shirking many responsibilities to leave the site as they first found it. Perhaps the companies who operated under DOD contracts out there should be pursued as I'm sure they made and are still making billions in profits from our federal tax dollars being spent on various projects abroad.
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:
- Posts that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability.
- Disparaging remarks, abusive language or obscene comments.
- Threats, whether obvious or veiled.
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.










There is 1 comment to this article.
Comments are found beneath the Yahoo! ad below.