Time for Some Answers
Last week’s decision by a federal judge allowing neighbors of Rocketdyne to pursue a class-action lawsuit increases pressure on both the aerospace giant and its critics to finally determine whether years of nuclear research and rocket testing put thousands of nearby residents at risk. It also provides the opportunity for the federal government to renew its commitment to studying the long-term health effects on residents in the San Fernando and Simi valleys.
Raising the stakes for both sides, U.S. District Judge Audrey B. Collins opened the case against Rocketdyne to as many as 200,000 people who live near Rocketdyne’s Santa Susana Field Laboratory and three other nearby facilities. Some neighbors claim years of testing at the sites put them at risk for a variety of ailments and contaminated their property. Rocketdyne has argued that although its property may be fouled--the Santa Susana lab is undergoing a $55-million cleanup--there’s no evidence to support claims that toxic substances seeped off-site.
Even so, Rocketdyne’s potential liability is astronomical--as are the potential payoffs for lawyers and families pressing the case. With that kind of money at stake, two things are certain. And both argue strongly for unbiased federal involvement.
First, both sides will no doubt recruit their own experts. It’s doubtful that equally respectable experts with identical credentials working for different sides in a civil case will reach the same conclusion. In these types of cases, judgments often hinge on whose expert the jury finds most credible. A federal study could alleviate some of the guesswork for jurors--helping them reach a conclusion that is not only just but correct. No one knows what the correct conclusion is right now.
Second, the pressure to settle will be considerable. Civil law is an exercise in expected values. Except for the rare zealots, the desire to press a case wanes when its litigation costs exceed the potential benefits. In other words, if Rocketdyne--now owned by Boeing North American--and its lawyers determine it’s cheaper to settle the case than continue fighting, they will likely follow that course without admitting liability. It’s smart business. Unfortunately, it’s not such smart public policy. The big question of whether surrounding land is contaminated could go unanswered as plaintiffs cash their settlement checks in private. A study paid for with public money could help provide that answer.
The expansion of the case against Rocketdyne provides the best opportunity to date to answer many of the serious questions surrounding the lingering effects of the company’s operations. Certainly more study is warranted. A UCLA study last year concluded that some lab employees have higher-than-expected cancer rates. Another UCLA study--this one looking at the effects of exposure to chemicals--is expected to be released in September. But no official study has linked activities at Rocketdyne’s labs to health problems in the general population. Responsibility for that shifted earlier this year from the Department of Energy to the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
CDC officials should recognize the importance of such a study for thousands who live near Rocketdyne facilities. They deserve answers. Rocketdyne deserves answers. As a leader in aerospace, Rocketdyne and its scientists helped give birth to the Space Age and developed rockets that kept peace during the Cold War--contributions that cannot be undervalued or diminished. Whether those contributions came with a price remains to be known.
