HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT OF THE BOWL IN AREA I OF THE SANTA SUSANA FIELD LABORATORY VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for
The Boeing Company
By
Post/Hazeltine Associates 2607 Orella Street Santa Barbara, CA 93105 [email protected]
August 3, 2010 Summary of Findings
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This assessment provides an evaluation of the eligibility of the Bowl, a former rocket engine test facility located in Area I of the Santa Susan Field Laboratory, for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHP). Bowl was used for static testing of rocket engines and rocket engine components during the period between the late 1940s and the mid 1960s. Historical research and evaluation of Area I by Post/Hazeltine Associates identified the following two historic themes under Bowl would potentially be eligible for listing in the NRHP: 1) Defense- related rocket engine research and testing during the Cold War period and 2) Rocket engine research and development for American space program (space exploration). Alterations since the period of significance that have severely compromised the physical integrity of the Bowl facility include the almost complete demolition of VTS-II and VTS-III, the partial demolition of VTS-1 and the partial demolition of the control house (Building 900). While elements of VTS-1 remain in place, its ability to convey its purpose and function has been severely compromised by the loss of the stand’s metal superstructure’s and instrumentation. Therefore, this report concludes that the Bowl facility was not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources because it lacked sufficient physical integrity to convey its appearance or historic associations during the resource’s period of significance.
Pamela Post, Ph.D., principal investigator, Ron Nye, Ph.D., Alexandra Cole, M.A. and Timothy Hazeltine prepared this report.
i TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section______Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION...... 1
2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 1
3.0 METHODLOGY...... 3
4.0 HISTORIC CONTEXT, AREA I AND AREA III, SANTA SUSANA FIELD LABORATORY...... 7 4.1 Burro Flats (1782-1947)...... 7 4.2 North American Aviation and the Creation of SSFL (1947-1948)...... 7 4.3 Development of Rocket Testing Facilities at Bowl in Area I, Rocket Testing Program in Area I (1948-1960)...... 9 4.4 Rocket Testing Programs in Area I (1960-2006)...... 10 4.5 SSFL in Area I (2006-2009)...... 11 4.6 Overview of Major Rocket Engine Testing programs in Area I of SSFL ...... 11 4.7 Notable Individuals Associated With Bowl in Area 1...... 13
5.0 SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT...... 15 5.1 The Bowl Test Facility in Area I...... 16 5.2 The Bowl ...... 16
6.0 IDENTIFICATION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES...... 25 6.1 Introduction ...... 25 6.2 National Register of Historic Places Criteria ...... 26 6.2 Evaluation of Resources in Area I 6.3 Historic Context and Identification of Historic Resources under National Register of Historic Places Criteria ...... 26 6.4 Evaluation of Bowl for listing as a Significant Historic Resource...... 28 6.4.1 The Bowl ...... 29 6.4.2 Potential Historic District...... 32 6.4.2.1 Bowl...... 32 6.4.3 Eligibility for Listing in the California Register of Historical Resources...32
7.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 32
8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND RESOURCES CONSULTED IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT ...... 33
APPENDICES: A: Figures (Historical Photographs) B. Maps C. Photographs (existing conditions)
i 1.0 INTRODUCTION (Project Summary and Objectives)
This historic resources survey and assessment of the Bowl, a former rocket engine test facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL), Ventura County, California was prepared at the request of The Boeing Company (Boeing) (Appendix B: Map 1 – Map 5). It follows the Federal guidelines for Historic Cultural Resource Studies. The methodology for determining whether the property meets the eligibility requirements for listing as a historic resource under Federal eligibility criteria is based on archival research to determine the historic context of the resources within the project area and an on-site evaluation of the physical and visual integrity of the project site, including an evaluation of individual buildings, structures and features.
The report includes the following components:
1) Documentation of the historic context and physical appearance of Area I of the SSFL, in which the Bowl facility is located; 2) Documentation of the historic context and physical appearance of the Bowl; 3) Evaluation of the integrity of the Bowl; 4) Identification of potential historic, architectural, and cultural resources within the Bowl; 5) Evaluation of the potential eligibility of historic resources for listing at the Federal level and; 6) Evaluation of the potential eligibility of historic resources for listing at the State level.
Information generated by the study was used in the preparation of a Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) documentation of historic resources evaluated in this study.
Pamela Post, Ph.D., principal investigator, Ron Nye, Ph.D., Alexandra Cole, M.A. and Timothy Hazeltine prepared this report.
2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This assessment provides an evaluation of the eligibility of the Bowl in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL), for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHP). Historical research and evaluation of Area I by Post/Hazeltine Associates identified the following two historic themes under which Bowl in Area I potentially would be eligible for listing in the NRHP: 1) Defense- related rocket engine research and testing during the Cold War period (Area I including the Bowl Facility); and 2) Rocket engine research and development for American space program (space exploration) (Area I including the Bowl Facility). This report concludes that none of the surveyed resources located in the Bowl area were eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or in the California Register of Historic Resources.
Santa Susana Field Laboratory
The Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL) is located in an unincorporated area of northeastern Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 1 Ventura County, approximately eight miles southeast of Simi, California and seven miles west of the unincorporated community of Canoga Park in Los Angeles County. Historically, the area is known as the Simi Hills. The SSFL facility is divided into the following four administrative areas: 1) Area I, composed of 671 acres owned by the Boeing Company that was the site of administrative offices, laboratories, support facilities, component test labs and rocket testing facilities, including the Bowl and Canyon test stand areas, and a 42-acre section owned by the federal government and administered by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) that housed a liquid oxygen plant (see Appendix B, Map 3); 2) Area II, a 410-acre section owned by the federal government and administered by NASA that encompassed the Bravo, Alfa, Coca, and Delta test areas and Component Test Lab II (see Appendix B, Map 3); 3) Area III, a 114-acre section owned by the Boeing Company that encompassed the STL-IV test area, support facilities, and the Hydrogen Test Lab (see Appendix B, Map 3); 4) Area IV, a 290-acre area that housed nuclear-related research and development programs run by the Atomics International division of North American Aviation and the Department of Energy (DOE) (see Appendix B, Map 3). In addition, there are undeveloped areas to the northwest and south of these four areas. Currently, Area I is undergoing a decommissioning and demolition program conducted by Boeing.
Previous Surveys
Neither the Boeing-owned portion of Area I nor the Bowl facility have been the focus of previous historic resource evaluations (the NASA-owned portion of Area I has been the focus of a number of studies, including a recent study undertaken by Archaeological Consultants, Inc. and Weitze Research, in March 2009).
Summary of Assessment
This report concludes that neither the Bowl facility as a whole or its individual elements were eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or in the California Register of Historic Resources. Bowl has not retained sufficient integrity to contribute to the identified historic themes because of the substantial alterations to and partial demolition of the facility’s buildings, structures and features during the course of subsequent operations by Boeing and/or its predecessors in the 1970s, 1980s or 1990s. In addition, Bowl is not eligible for designation as a historic district because it no longer retains sufficient integrity to effectively convey its historic associations.
3.0 METHODOLOGY
Statement of Work
The historic resource evaluation encompassed site survey, research and assessment. The study focused on discrete clusters of buildings, structures and features in the Bowl facility in Area I which is potentially associated with the historic themes and excluded roads, culverts, pipelines or other general support features. The resources that were the focus of the historic resources Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 2 study encompassed clusters of buildings, structures and features located in the Bowl.
Research Methodology
Data for the report were derived from onsite survey of the facility and archival research carried out at the document and photographic archives at the SSFL, Boeing, and at Pratt Whitney’s Rocketdyne Division in March through November of 2009. Onsite survey was carried out between July and November 2009 by Pamela Post, Ph.D., Ronald Nye Ph.D., Alexandra Cole, M.A., and Timothy Hazeltine. Onsite interviews and telephone interviews of current and former employees also were carried out during this same time period. The criteria developed by the National Park Service for evaluating eligibility for listing on the NRHP and the Special Criteria for evaluating resources that are less than 50 years of age are the primary documents used in this assessment. The NRHP is a comprehensive inventory of historic resources spanning the nation. Administered by the National Park Service, the Register includes buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts that embody historic, architectural, engineering, archaeological, or cultural importance at the national, state or local level. Generally, a potential resource must be 50 years of age or older, meet one or more of the significance criteria, and retain sufficient integrity to convey its historic significance. However, there are cases in which a resource that is less than 50 years of age may be eligible for listing if it possesses “exceptional importance.”
National Register of Historic Places Criteria
The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is the nation's master inventory of known historic resources and includes listings of buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts that possess historic, architectural, engineering, archaeological, or cultural significance at the national, state, or local level. Four criteria provide the basis under which a structure, site, building, district, or object can be considered significant for listing on the NRHP. A potential resource needs to meet only one of the four criteria to achieve significance. The criteria include resources that:
(A) Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or (B) Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or (C) Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or (D) Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
National Register of Historic Places Bulletin 22
In addition, as noted in NPS Bulletin 22, the following Criteria Considerations should be evaluated when considering a property’s eligibility for listing in the NRHP:
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 3 Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, or graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the National Register. However, such properties will qualify if they are integral parts of districts that do meet the criteria or if they fall within the following categories: (a) A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or historical importance; or (b) A building or structure removed from its original location but which is significant primarily for architectural value, or which is the surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person or event; or (c) A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building directly associated with his productive life. (d) A cemetery which derives its primary significance from graves of persons of transcendent importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or from association with historic events; or (e) A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same association has survived; or (f) A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance; or (g) A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance. This exception is described further in NPS "How to Evaluate and Nominate Potential National Register Properties That Have Achieved Significance Within the Last 50 Years'' which is available from the National Register of Historic Places Division, National Park Service, United States Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240 (NPS, Bulletin 22: 1998).
As noted in Bulletin 22, resources that are less than 50 years of age at the time of evaluation are generally not eligible for listing in the NRHP (www.nps.gov/history/nr/bulletins/nrb22). In order to be eligible for listing a resource must possess “exceptional importance” at the national, state, or local level (NPS, Bulletin 22: n.p.).
The rationale or justification for exceptional importance should be an explicit part of the statement of significance. The second section should contain the justification as to why the property can be determined to be of exceptional importance. It must discuss the context used for evaluating the property. It must demonstrate that the context and the resources associated with it can be judged to be “Historic.” It must document the existence of sufficient research or evidence to permit a dispassionate evaluation of the resource. Finally, it must use the background just presented to summarize the way in which a resource is importance (National Register Bulletin: Guidelines for Evaluating Properties that have Achieved Significance Within the Past Fifty Years).
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 4 Integrity
For a structure, building or property to be eligible for listing in the NRHP it must meet at least one of the significance criteria, be (in most cases) at least 50 years of age or older, and retain its visual and physical integrity. As defined in the National Register of Historic Places Bulletin 15, integrity is: “the ability of a property to convey its significance.” Integrity involves several aspects, including location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The seven aspects of integrity are defined below.
Location: Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. Design: Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. Setting: Setting is the physical environment of an historic property, constituting topographic features, vegetation, manmade features, and relationships between buildings or open space. Materials: Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form an historic property. Workmanship: Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture, people, or artisan during any given period in history or pre-history. Feeling: Feeling is a property's expression of the aesthetic or historical sense of a particular period of time. Association: Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and an historic property.
National Register Bulletin 15, Section VIII provides further information regarding the application of the integrity criteria to a property:
Historic properties either retain integrity (this is, convey their significance) or they do not. Within the concept of integrity, the National Register criteria recognizes the seven aspects or qualities listed above that, in various combinations, define integrity. To retain historic integrity a property will always possess several, and usually most, of the aspects. The retention of specific aspects of integrity is paramount for a property to convey its significance. Determining which of these aspects are most important to a particular property requires knowing why, where, and when the property is significant (National Register Bulletin 15, 1999).
Historic integrity is threatened by major changes, such as demolition or subsequent development that alter the features that characterized a property during its period of historic significance. Integrity may also be lost due to the cumulative effect of relocated and lost historic buildings and structures or the disappearance of other features, such as roadways and landscape that helped to define the historic use of a property.
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 5 The following changes, when occurring after the period of significance, may reduce the historic integrity of a resource:
Changes in land use and management that alter the setting of a historic resource.
Deterioration, abandonment, relocation, or demolition of historic buildings and structures that are contributors to a historic resource.
Substantial alteration of buildings and structures (through remodeling or additions) that diminish the resource’s ability to convey its historic character or significance.
Replacement or removal of features, such as roads and fences, that contribute to the setting of a historic resource.
The final decision regarding integrity is based on the condition of the overall resource and its ability to convey significance. The level of historic significance and the nature, extent and impact of changes to the resource since its period of significance are important factors to consider when assessing integrity.
California Register of Historical Resources Criteria
1.) A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.).
2.) A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant.
3.) Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architecturally, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be an historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852) including the following:
3a Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; 3b Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 6 3c Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or; 3d Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
4.0 HISTORIC CONTEXT, THE BOWL FACILITY IN AREA I OF THE SANTA SUSANA FIELD LABORATORY
This section of the report presents an historical overview of the SSFL between European contact and 2009.
4.1 Burro Flats (1782-1947)
In 1795, the Spanish government granted 113,000 acres, including the future location of the project area, to Miguel, Francisco, and Patricio Pico. Known as Rancho Simi, the land grant was one of only two land grants in the Ventura area that were allotted by the Spanish Government (Triem 1985: 34). In 1848 California was ceded to the United States as a result of the 1846-1848 Mexican-American War. Subsequently, the Pico family subdivided and sold off its rancho. The former rancho lands were bought and sold a number of times and by the early twentieth century the future location of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL) had been acquired by the Dundas and the Silvernale families who used the land for the grazing of cattle and livestock (Sapere, 2005).
4.2 North American Aviation and Creation of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory (1947- 1948)
A summary of the early history of rocket testing at the SSFL can be found in the historical resources study prepared in 2009 by Archaeological Consultants, Inc. and Weitze Research. Information derived from the NASA study as well as from research carried out as part of the current study provides the basis for the following historical overview. The following provides a overview of the history of North American Aviation, its successor companies, and their operations in Area I of the SSFL.
In 1945, shortly after the end of World War II, the United States embarked on wide-ranging rocket research and development, as well as nuclear research and development programs. These programs were largely driven by the increasing geopolitical tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union, in particular the Soviet Union’s drive to become a nuclear power. In California, aviation and engineering companies that had expanded their research and development facilities during the war vigorously pursued contracts for rocket testing programs with the Federal government. One of these firms was North American Aviation Inc. (NAA), headquartered at the time at the Los Angeles Municipal Airport in Inglewood. Founded in 1928 by Clement Melville Keys, the company was initially centered in Dundalk, Maryland, but moved to Inglewood, California in 1934, after receiving a contract from the Army Air Corps to build 267 trainer planes (Kraemer 2006: 15-17). Following America’s entry into the war, in 1941, NAA substantially increased its production of aircraft and by the end of 1945 had built Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 7 almost 43,000 planes, most notably the P-51 Mustang.
By 1945, NAA had established itself as one of the nation’s leading aviation companies with over 90,000 employees. However, initially, like many other aviation firms in the immediate postwar period, NAA saw a dramatic reduction in its government contracts and a consequent reduction in the workforce. Foreseeing the importance that rocket technology would play in the postwar era the company’s principals, NAA’s chairman of the board, James Kindelberger, and president, Lee Atwood, created a new division charged with developing defense-related rocket technology (Kraemer 2006: 21-22). Under the leadership of Bill Bollay, an aeronautical engineer educated at Caltech, NAA’s new division focused on the development of an experimental rocket based on the German’s V-2 model (Bollay gained his early exposure to rocket engine technology at the California Institute of Technology’s (Caltech) Guggenheim Aeronautical Laboratory) (Archaeological Consultants, Inc., and Weitze Research, March 2009: 3-3).
In spring of 1946 NAA was awarded a 2.3 million dollar contract by the Army Air Force (AAF) to help develop the MX-770 (Navaho) surface-to-surface guided missile with a range of 175 to 500 miles. The first versions of the MX-770 represented slightly modified iterations of the German V-2 rocket developed by Wernher von Braun and Walter Riedel for the MX-770 program based at White Sands, New Mexico using captured German V-2 rockets. In 1947- 1948 “Operation Paperclip” was initiated by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Commerce (DOC), the purpose of which was to assign German scientists to branches of the military and the DOC. Those assigned to the DOC were given temporary assignments to civilian defense-related companies such as NAA. The most notable of these German scientists and technicians was Walter Riedel, considered the “father of the liquid- fueled rocket engine” (Archaeological Consultants, Inc., and Weitze Research, March 2009: 3- 1). NAA initially carried out rocket research and development for the Navaho rocket at its Inglewood facility and in 1947 fired its first rocket engine in the company’s parking lot. However, it soon became clear that rocket testing could not continue in such a heavily urbanized area and that NAA not only would need a larger facility, but one that would provide greater security and safety for its testing programs. In early 1947 the Army Air Force contracted with NAA to establish a full-scale testing site in southern California (Kraemer 2006: 29). After much searching in the Los Angeles area, a site in the Simi foothills, on the northwestern edge of the San Fernando Valley, was chosen for the field laboratory.
In March 1947 NAA signed a long-term lease with the Dundas family for a 620-acre portion of its San Fernando Valley ranch. The leased acreage would become the nucleus of the SSFL. Subsequently, NAA would purchase the 620-acre site and additional acreage from the Dundas family. Located on an elevated plateau and surrounded by large rocky outcroppings, the site’s topography provided not only the ideal location for test stands, but easily controlled access to the facility, as well as providing sufficient space for research and testing facilities. Located at the far northwest corner of the San Fernando Valley, the new facility was within commuting distance of the main NAA facility in Inglewood, but was isolated enough from major population centers that it would not present safety concerns to established towns or cities in the Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 8 Los Angeles area. Along with the SSFL other test facilities were being developed concurrently, including White Sands, New Mexico (General Electric), the Malta Test Station, near Schenectady, New York (General Electric) and the Alamogordo/Holloman facility, near White Sands (Archaeological Consultants, Inc., and Weitze Research, March 2009: 3-7). Like the Army’s White Sands facility, which took advantage of the area’s natural topography, SSFL, with its rocky outcrops and box canyons, proved ideal for the building of rocket test stands.
4.3 Development of Rocket Testing Facilities in Area I and Rocket Testing Programs in Area I, (1948-1960)
In early 1948 NAA received a contract from the Air Force to increase the range of the Navaho rocket engine to 1,000 miles (the Air Force, initially a part of the Army, had become a separate branch of the military in 1947). In1949 the first group of static rocket engine test stands, outdoor testing area, a control house, a component test laboratory (Component Test Laboratory I) and a workshop building (Building 301) were constructed at the SSFL facility to test rocket engines and engine components for the Navaho program (Appendix A: Figures 1 - 12). The first vertical test stand facilities at SSFL were established in an area called the Bowl; initial construction included a temporary test stand, a single vertical test stand (Vertical Test Stand 1 or VTS I), a preparation stand, a blockhouse (control center), two water tanks, and several small supporting facilities, most of which were constructed of reinforced concrete (see Appendix A: Figures 1 - 12). Selection of the site, as well as the design of the first testing facilities at Bowl were based largely on German World War II prototypes such as the test facility located in an open pit quarry near Lehesten, Germany. Located south of Nordhausen on Germany’s Thuringian-Bavarian border, Lehesten’s quarry’s bowl-like depression proved to be an ideal location for the testing of the V-2 rocket engine. While the exact degree to which German prototypes determined the search and selection of American test site facilities is debatable, it is likely that the Bowl’s small box canyon was chosen as the site for the first static test stand because of German precedents like Lehesten (Archaeological Consultants, Inc. and Weitze Research, March 2009: 3-9). In these early days “finding sites that contributed to the physical design and engineering of the static rocket engine test stands was both expeditious and practical, and allowed rocket science to move forward as quickly as possible” (Archaeological Consultants, Inc. and Weitze Research, March 2009: 3-9 and 3-10). As noted earlier, while Peenemünde is usually cited as the inspiration for the design of the Bowl, the more likely prototype was the German open pit quarry site at Lehesten (Neufeld, 1996/1999: 197-207; 269). The Bowl shared several design features with its German prototype, most notably its concrete and steel test stand, the concrete instrumentation room and the concrete spillway for the flame bucket. While the Bowl is sometimes credited as being the first liquid-propellant, high-thrust rocket engine test stand in the United States, it was preceded by others including, a static rocket test stand built at White Sands, New Mexico in 1946. However, the White Sands site did not incorporate “the refined design of the triple group (of static test stands) and its incorporated “bowl” setting as at Santa Susana” (Archaeological Consultants, Inc. and Weitze Research, March 2009: 3-9 and 3-10).
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 9 In November 1949, a temporary test stand at the Bowl was completed for the initial testing of the Navaho engine (see Appendix A: Figure 5). On March 2, 1950, the temporary test stand was used for a thrust chamber test using propellant from pressurized tanks (Kraemer 2006: 36). Vertical Test Stand 1 (VTS-1), the first permanent test stand, was completed in early 1950. Eight months later, on November 15, 1950, the first large scale test of an American designed and manufactured main stage large liquid propellant rocket in the United States took place when a 75K experimental XLR43-NA-1 rocket engine was fired-up on VTS-1, in the Bowl (this engine was an experimental configuration for the Redstone engine designed for the Army) (Kraemer 2006: 38) (Appendix A: Figure 13 and see Figure 12). The rocket would remain on VTS-1 for six months undergoing more than 60 test firings. At the end of the testing, the Navaho’s 75K engine became America’s first operational large- scale liquid propellant rocket engine (Kraemer 2006: 38). The next year, in January 1951, a horizontal test stand was activated adjacent to VTS-1 for the Cook Sled Test, a short-lived program intended to develop a missile capable of being launched horizontally from a bomber. Further improvements to the Bowl did not occur until a second test stand, VTS-2, was built for testing the Navaho G38 Engine in September 1953 (Appendix A: Figure 14). Subsequently, a third test stand was built in the Bowl in 1955 (Appendix A: Figures 15 - 16). While the original construction phase at Bowl is well documented in surviving photographs at the SSFL, none of the original construction drawings could be located, making it difficult to document who was responsible for the design of the original test stands. It is likely that they, like other early test stand complexes at SSFL such as Alpha in Area II were designed by the engineering firm of Ralph M. Parsons (Archaeological Consultants, Inc. and Weitze Research 2009: 3-28). During this period testing was not just confined to the large test stands at the Bowl.
4.4 Rocket Testing Programs in Area I, (1960-2006)
In 1961, NASA modified the Redstone engine for use as the propulsion system for the first manned Mercury mission (). In that same year NASA contracted with Rocketdyne to develop and build the Large Rocket Engine System for the Saturn Apollo program (Archaeological Consultants, Inc. and Weitze Research, March 2009: 3-34). By the mid-1960s SSFL was testing the SII stage of the Saturn V vehicle, the H-1 and J-1 engines and components for the F- 1 engine. The Saturn/Apollo program, including its H-1 and J-1 engines, necessitated extensive alterations to the Bowl. In 1975, with the Saturn contract winding down, the workforce at Rockwell was reduced by some 85 percent to approximately 3,600 employees. Operations at the SSFL decreased, with the component test labs and rocket test stand areas seeing significantly less use after 1975. Facilities in Area I, including Bowl were altered to support a diverse range of other programs. Bowl was converted into a test facility for an experimental coal gasification program between 1977 and 1995 (Appendix A: Figure 17). Starting in the 1970s, facilities which had no prospective uses were dismantled or demolished in the course of SSFL operations. These included the almost complete demolition of VTS 2 and VTS 3, and the partial demolition of VTS 1 and the Control House at the Bowl facility. By the early 2000s, the remaining facilities at the SSFL were shuttered or otherwise secured as they were not being utilized, and Boeing commenced the decommissioning, dismantling and demolition process for these remaining structures. Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 10 4.5 SSFL in Area I (2006-2009)
With the exception of the ongoing laser testing program in Area I, all other testing programs at the SSFL ended in 2003. In 2006 most of Boeing’s Rocketdyne Division was sold to Pratt Whitney, with Boeing retaining the real estate that comprises the SSFL. The decommissioning and dismantling process has continued through 2009. Buildings and structures demolished in 2009 include the ATPF facility (continuously altered from the 1950s through the 1980s), the CTL I facility (continuously altered from 1950s through 2005), and the ancillary support facilities designated as Building 301, Building 319, Building 408, Building 436, and Building 989.
4.6 Overview of Major Rocket Engine Testing Programs at Bowl in Area I of the SSFL
Navaho Program
The Navaho program, which was awarded to NAA in April of 1946, was intended to design a missile capable of delivering a warhead a distance of 500 miles. The initial design of the missile was based on the German V-2 winged rocket, of which two were shipped to California for analysis. Aided by German engineers, such as Dieter Huzel, an experimental engine with a 75,000 pound thrust was developed and tested at the SSFL (Kraemer 2006: 33-34). In 1947, the United States Army Air Force became the United States Air Force, and was given responsibility for overseeing the testing and production of missiles with a range above 1000 miles. In order to bring the Navaho program under the direction of the Air Force the Navaho’s range was increased to over a 1,000 miles, requiring the use of a ramjet engine, rather than the boost/glide configuration then being developed for the MX-770 (Kraemer 2006: 34). In November 1950 Vertical Test Stand 1, located in the Bowl, was used for the first test of the MX-770 engine (see Appendix A: Figure 12). At the same time the Air Force wanted to increase the range of the missile to 5,500 miles. This necessitated a three-step program: first, the development of the X-10, an experimental aircraft that could test the aerodynamics and guidance of the missile; second, the design and construction of a full-scale missile with a liquid fuel booster (Navaho II); and third, the development of an operational prototype that employed a new bi-propellant technology (LOX-RP1). Testing for the Navaho program occurred at the Bowl, Alfa, Coca, and Delta test stands; component testing took place at APTF and CTL I. In July 1957, the Air Force terminated the Navaho II program in favor of a more advanced prototype, Navaho III, which was nearing operational status. The decision to end the Navaho program was made after the successful launch of an ICBM missile with a greater range than the Navaho. The cessation of the Navaho program forced the lay off of over 3,000 of Rocketdyne’s employees and clouded the immediate prospects for the division.
Atlas Program
While its workforce had been reduced by the loss of the Navaho, Rocketdyne continued work on the Atlas engine for which NAA had been awarded the contract in May 1954. The Atlas engine, which would power the United State’s first Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM), Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 11 helped launch the missile into orbit in November 1958 (Kraemer 2006:98). The Atlas program was under the direction of Doug Hege and his deputy, Ed Monteath (Monteath became manager of the project in 1958) (Kraemer 2006: 74-75). The Atlas engine also was used for the United State’s manned rocket program and to power the Mercury rocket that sent John Glenn into orbit on February 20, 1962 (Kraemer 2006: 101). In the succeeding years the Atlas engine became the workhorse of the nation’s space program and over its 47-year lifespan it was used to launch vehicles for satellites and to send exploratory spacecraft to the moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, and Saturn (Kraemer 2006: 109). Testing for the Atlas program occurred at the Bowl, Alfa, Bravo, Coca, and Delta test stands. Component testing took place at CTL-1, CTL- II, CTL-III, and APTF.
Redstone Program
The Redstone program was intended to develop a 200-mile short range missile for the United States Army. NAA was awarded the contract in December of 1951. The 75,000 K Navaho I engine, developed by NAA, formed the basis for its design (Appendix A: Figure 48). Research and development was carried out in conjunction with the Army test center in Huntsville, Alabama. Testing for the missile largely took place at the White Sands testing range in New Mexico. The vertical test stands at the Bowl and Canyon test areas were used for engine testing that supported the first launch of the Redstone in 1953 (The ELS Globe: July/August 2003: Vol. 2.5; 2). Redstone missiles were used by the Army from June 1958 to June 1964. It is not clear which, if any support facilities at SSFL were used for component testing for the Redstone program.
Jupiter Program
The Jupiter missile had its origins in a joint Army-Navy program initiated in 1955 to develop a medium range ballistic missile (MRBM). The Navy withdrew from the program in November of 1956. Later, that same month, the program was transferred to the Air Force when the Department of Defense (DOD) re-assigned all land-based missile programs with a range greater than 200 miles from the Army to the Air Force. At NAA project management for the Jupiter program was under the direction of Chan Hamlin (Kraemer 2006: 77). The Jupiter engine tested at SSFL, which was a modified version of the Redstone engine, was used to power the Explorer I, the first United State’s earth satellite, launched on February 1, 1958. The most notable discovery of the mission was the discovery of radiation belts around the earth. The radiation belts were named the Van Allen belts in honor of James Van Allen who designed the satellite’s scientific instrumentation. The vertical test stands at the Bowl, Canyon, and Alfa test areas were used for engine testing that supported the Jupiter program (The ELS Globe: July/August 2003: Vol. 2.5; 2-6). It is not clear which support facilities at SSFL were used for component testing for the Jupiter program. However, since CTL-1, CTL-II and CTL-III and APTF were in operation, it is likely that one or more of these facilities were utilized for testing.
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 12 J-2 Engine (Saturn IV)
North American Rockwell was award the contract to design and build the J-2 rocket for the second stage of the multi-stage Saturn IV in the late 1950s. Tested at SSFL and constructed at the company’s Seal Beach plant, the engine powered all nine launches of the Saturn IV (IB). The last J-2 engine was used for the Apollo-Soyuz mission in 1975. J-2 Engines were tested at the Delta test stand in Area II. Some testing for the J-2 program also occurred at Bowl. Component testing occurred at CTL-I, CTL-III, CTL-IV, CTL-V, and most likely, at APTF.
F-1 Engine (Saturn V)
Because of its heavy payloads, the multi-stage Saturn rocket, intended to carry astronauts to the moon, would require a booster stage that could provide 1.5 million pounds of thrust. In January of 1959 NASA signed a contract with NAA for development of the F-1 engine. Because of its immense size, the testing of the F-1 engine proved to be too unwieldy at SSFL. As a result, new test stands were built at Edwards Air Force Base, California in February 1959 (Kramer 2006: 162-163). While most of the testing occurred at Edwards Air Force Base, a significant amount of field testing took place at SSFL. Apollo 8 was the first manned space flight using the Saturn V rocket. In 1969 Apollo 11 completed the first manned mission to the moon. Further missions continued until Apollo 17 completed the final mission in December 1972. Engines for the Saturn V were tested at Bowl, Bravo, Coca, and Delta test stand areas. Component testing occurred at CTL-I, CTL-III, CLT-V, and most likely, at APTF.
4.7 Notable Individuals Associated with Bowl in Area I
During its period of active use between 1949 and the late 1980s a wide range of scientists, engineers and technicians carried out research and testing in Area I of the SSFL. Short biographies of the two most important of these individuals, Wernher von Braun and William Bollay, are provided below.
Wernher von Braun
Clearly the most well known of the scientists that were associated with the SSFL was Dr. Wernher von Braun, the German expatriate rocket scientist. Born in 1912, Braun, through the writing of “science fiction” authors such as Jules Verne and H.G. Wells developed an interest in space exploration and the writings of German theorist, Hermann Oberth (http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/vonbraun/bio.html). By the early 1930s the German Army had initiated an experimental program to develop rocket engines for military applications. Braun became a member of the German Army’s research team in 1932 and two years later in 1934 he received a Ph.D. in physics. By the early 1940s Braun who had become the leader of the rocket development program was deeply involved in the development of the V-2 ballistic missile. Research, testing and launch of the missile were carried out at a number of secret test facilities; the missiles were manufactured using forced labor. The liquid propellant-powered V-2, which was the first functioning rocket powered missile in the world, could deliver a Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 13 warhead to a target 500 miles away. Beginning in 1944, the V-2 was used against London and other British cities causing widespread devastation. While Braun had successfully led the development of the V-2, by early 1945 he realized that Germany was losing the war and coordinated the surrender of many of his top scientists, engineers and technicians as well as actual rocket engines, components and schematics to the United States Army (http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/vonbraun/bio.html).
Clearly, the transfer of much of Germany’s missile technology, as well as many of its leading scientists, engineers and technicians to the United States would have a profound effect on the nation’s own missile development programs. Initially, many of the Germans worked directly for the United States Army at their White Sands Proving Ground, New Mexico. Later, in 1950, the team moved to the Army’s Redstone Arsenal located near Huntsville Alabama where Braun became director of the Development Operations Division of the Army Ballistic Missile Agency (ABMA). During the 1950s ABMA focused on the development of the Jupiter class of rocket engines, which were used to launch the United States’ first satellite, Explorer 1 in January of 1958. The successful launch of Explorer 1 initiated an expansive period in the American space program that would span the period between the late 1950s and the late 1980s. Braun had a significant impact on many aspects of the nation’s rocket program, from the location and design of test facilities to the development of engine and engine component prototypes. The design and layout of early test stands including Bowl and Canyon in Area I and Alfa and Delta in Area II of the SSFL were inspired to greater or lesser degrees by the German test facilities that had been the focus of Braun’s V-2 program. Of these, VTS-1 at Bowl was in its design the closest to its German precedents, while later test stands including VTS-2 and VTS-3 at Bowl eschewed the use of concrete test stands for steel superstructures. Braun played a fairly direct role in development and testing for Jupiter and Navaho ballistic missile programs. While testing for the Navaho program took place at the SSFL, much of the testing and development for the Jupiter program that was most closely associated with Braun took place at Redstone Arsenal.
After NASA was established in 1960, Braun was instrumental in the creation of the American space program which included among its goals manned flight to the moon. This program required the design and construction of rocket engines that dwarfed in scale and technical sophistication the Redstone, Atlas or Jupiter programs. Braun oversaw the Saturn program to develop the multistage Saturn rocket from the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville (the former Redstone Arsenal). While research and testing for the Saturn program did take place at the SSFL, it was only one of several facilities where these activities took place, which included most notably MSFC (a detailed history of the Saturn program as it relates to SSFL can be found in the study of Area II prepared for NASA) (Archaeological Consultants Inc. and Weitze Research May 2009: 3.15). Braun’s contributions to the Saturn program cannot be underestimated; more than any other scientist he was not only the “public” face of the American space program, he was also the person most responsible for the overall design of the Saturn launch vehicle. Braun also played a critical role as director of MSFC, where he successfully oversaw the completion of the Saturn program and laid the groundwork for later
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 14 programs such as development of a reusable launch vehicle. In 1970, less than a year after Apollo 11 successfully landed American astronauts on the moon, Braun left MSFC for Washington D.C. where he was to oversee strategic planning for the American space program. However, Braun, who was unhappy with the funding cutbacks for the space program, decided to leave government employ for the private sector where he took a position with Fairchild Industries. Braun died in 1977, after contracting cancer. Notwithstanding his early work for Germany’s Nazi regime, Braun is usually considered the preeminent rocket scientist between the 1930s and the late 1960s.
William (Bill) Bollay
Born in Stuttgart, Germany in 1911, Bollay moved with his family to the United States in 1924. In 1933 he received a scholarship at Caltech where he studied under Theodore von Karman, then a leading engineer and physicist in the field of aeronautics and astronautics. After receiving his Ph.D. Bollay taught at Caltech and Harvard where he focused on aerodynamic studies (Kraemer 2006: 21). Just before the outbreak of World War II Bollay enlisted in the Navy, where he was assigned to its Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer), the material-support division for Naval Aviation. At BuAer Bollay focused on the development of turbojets. After the end of World War II, Bollay was hired by NAA to head its Aerophysics Laboratory (also known as the “Technical Research Laboratory” (Kraemer 2006: 22). Bollay was responsible for developing NAA’s rocket propulsion program and hiring a team of engineers and physicists including George Sutton, Edward Redding, John Tormey, Tom Dixon and William Cecka that would form the core of the company’s rocket development team (Kraemer 2006 22-23). Bollay, who oversaw testing at the NAA Inglewood facility, was responsible for finding a new field test lab at Santa Susana. This became the center for field testing for the MX-770 Navaho missile being developed by NAA for the Army. It was Bollay along with NAA chief engineer who made the critical decision to use the design specifications of the German V-2 rocket as a starting point for the Navaho rocket (Kraemer 2010: 29). This included test firing a refurbished V-2 rocket that was used to design an American-built and designed rocket engine that was named the Mark II (Archaeological Consultants Inc. and Weitze Research May 2009: 3-4). At the SSFL Bollay oversaw the design and construction of new facilities such as Bowl, Canyon, and CTL I and CTL II where the Navaho rocket engine was tested. Bollay left NAA in 1957 to form his own company. While Bollay’s association with the SSFL lasted less than 10 years, he played a critical role in the creation of the test facility and the success of NAA’s early rocket engine programs.
5.0 Survey and Assessment
The following section of the report summarizes the results of field survey and research for the Bowl facility in Area I. The resource descriptions are based on existing conditions between July and October of 2009. The level of analysis and description is sufficient to develop a history of the individual facilities and their operation. It does not however, provide detailed histories of each individual feature (i.e. specific use and modification histories for individual tanks or other secondary features). Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 15 5.1 The Bowl Test Facility in Area I
The Bowl facility encompasses remnants of three vertical test stands, a control house and support facilities largely built between 1949 and 1963 (see Appendix B: Maps 3 & 4). The following section of the report provides descriptions and an overview of the historical development of the Bowl facility.
5.2 The Bowl
Descriptions:
The Bowl
Located in a box canyon the Bowl is accessed via a paved roadway that extends south from Area I Road (Appendix B: see Maps 3 - 5). On the west side of the road there is an oval- shaped depression that once served as the R-1 reservoir. On its east side the road diverged into two forks, with one lane extending southeast to the control center in Building 900. From Building 900 one branch of the driveway extends down into the Bowl (Appendix C: Photographs 1 – 11). Another segment of the road extends southeast around the west side of the Bowl where it extended past VTS-III, VTS-1 and VTS-II. A branch of this road extended from south of VTS-III to tanks area. Detailed descriptions of the major components of the Bowl including the individual test stands, control center and surviving buildings are found below. Other features at the Bowl include the R-1 reservoir, located at the entrance to Bowl and the retention pond, located at the base of the three test stands. The purpose of the retention pond was to impound water, fuel and solvent that was generated by testing.
Vertical Test Stand 1 (VTS-1) (Building 317)
Designed by American technicians and scientists, as well as German expatriate scientists, the design of VTS-1, was based to a great extent, on the German World War II test stands (The ELS Globe: July/August 2003: Vol. 2.5; 1). Built in 1949, the test stand’s superstructure was partially demolished in the mid-1990s as a part of ongoing operations at SSFL. Originally, the stand’s concrete superstructure was surrounded by a metal superstructure that included a large jib- style crane. The concrete tower sheltered a control room (see Appendix A: Figure 13). Surviving remnants include the test stand’s reinforced concrete superstructure, concrete footing, concrete retaining walls that extend down into the canyon, and a part of the gunnite- lined spillway (Appendix C: see Photographs 1, 3, 4 & 5). The stand is composed of a 39-foot long rectangular-shaped reinforced concrete structure divided into two chambers which are open at their north and south ends. A metal gangway extends around three sides of the second floor level of the chamber on the north side of the test stand. The structure is divided into two floors. At its southwest end a partially dismantled set of steel stairs led from the ground to the second floor level, which housed an instrumentation room (remnants of door and window openings are visible at this level). On its west this component of the test stand is flanked by another structure which is composed of a 22-foot long structure whose east side is composed of Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 16 2-foot square piers supporting a flat roof. The west side of the structure, which is set flush with the edge of the canyon, is composed of a solid concrete wall reinforced with four buttresses, which continue down to form a retaining wall. On its south side the test stand is surrounded by concrete paving and several concrete equipment and tank pads. At the base of the retaining wall, a gunnite-lined culvert directed water away from the test cell into a retention pond located west of the control house. A horizontal metal tank is located at the base of the culvert. Remnants of concrete and asphalt paving surround the north and east sides of the test stand.
Vertical Test Stand 2 (VTS-2) (Structure 922)
Located north of VTS-1, VTS-2 was activated in 1953 (Appendix A: see Figure 25). VTS-2 featured a steel substructure and superstructure. Testing at VTS-3 supported the Navajo program between 1953 and 1957. In 1961 VTS-2 was dismantled and replaced with a new test stand to accommodate the higher thrust of the J-2 engine being developed for NASA. Testing the J-2 engine began in January of 1963 and extended through the late 1960s. Between 1975 and 1986 VTS-2 was the site of an experimental coal conversion program. As part of this program a Flash Process Unit was installed at VTS-II (another unit was located at Building 900). The purpose of the program was to develop an efficient method of gasifying coal for use as fuel. It was intended to build a demonstration facility for the project; however, funding was not authorized by the Department of Energy and the project was eventually terminated. The test stand’s superstructure and most of its substructure was removed in the mid-1990s as a part of ongoing operations at SSFL. In 2009, only remnants of its substructure and gunnite-lined spillway survive (Appendix C: see Photograph 2).
Vertical Test Stand 3 (VTS-3) (Structure 924)
Located southwest of VTS-1, VTS-3 was built in 1953 (Appendix A: see Figure 26). With the exception of remnants of its concrete footings and foundations and gunnite-lined spillway, this test stand was almost entirely demolished in the mid-1990s. Surviving features include concrete cradles for a number of horizontal storage tanks and sections of metal platforms that once flanked the test stand. When it was originally built, the test stand had a multi-stage steel superstructure supported by concrete footing and concrete retaining walls. By the early 1960s the test stand included two test stands VTS-3A and VTS-3B. A fire suppression system and new instrumentation systems were installed in 1963, when the test stand was altered for the J-2 program. To the west of VTS 3A was the Steam Plant Control Building and the VTS3 Term Building (since demolished). The test stand was further modified in 1978 when it became the location of an experimental hydro gasifier facility. Between 1988 and 1990 the Steam Blowdown Evaluation Rig (SABER) was located at VTS-III. As part of this project a cooling tower was installed south of VTS-3 (Appendix A: see Figure 7). The test stand’s superstructure and part of its substructure were removed in the mid-1990s as a part of ongoing operations at SSFL. In 2009, only remnants of its substructure and gunnite-lined spillway survive (see Appendix C: Photographs 1 & 2).
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 17 Other Building, Structures and Features
Control Center (Building 900)
Construction of Building 900 began in 1949 (Appendix A: see Figures 1, 3, & 4). Set on the opposite side of the canyon from the test stands the reinforced concrete building housed a control center and eight small test cells aligned along the south side of the building. The building’s main block is rectangular in configuration with poured-in-place board formed concrete walls, a flat concrete roof and metal frame window and door openings (see Appendix C: Photographs 3 & 6). A series of small windows in the building’s south elevation allowed scientists and technicians to view the engine test firings of the Bowl’s four test stands (see Appendix A: Figure 3). This side of the building is set on the edge of the Bowl and is defined by a concrete retaining wall. The building’s control room is a 30-foot by 40-foot rectangle whose roof is supported by four concrete columns (see Appendix C: Photograph 7). All of the room’s instrumentation, equipment and fixtures have been removed. The room’s south wall features a series of small rectangular observation windows that provided views towards the vertical test stands on the other side of the bowl. On its east and west sides the control room is flanked by 22-foot by 26-foot long rooms. The north side of the control room has a centrally placed doorway that opens into a 39-foot by 15-foot room whose roof, doors and windows have been removed. The walls of this room were constructed of prefabricated concrete panels set in metal frames. A set of doors set on the north side of this room were the primary entrance into the building. The building’s north exterior wall has been partially demolished. The east end of the building is flanked by four, three sided concrete test cells; two of the test cells face north while the other two face south towards the test stands on the other side of Bowl. Another double set of test cells are located on the west side of the building. At least two of the test cells were used in early flame bucket studies (flame buckets are steel structures that divert flame away from the stand and allow water to be injected into the exhaust thus reducing the temperature underneath the stand to prevent heat damage to the stand or the test article (Paul Costa personal communication, December, 2009). Between 1975 and 1984 Building 900 was the site of an experimental coal gasification project, which included the installation of a Flash Hydropyrolization Process Development Unit (another unit was located at VTS-2). The building was stripped of its original equipment, and partially demolished sometime after the mid 1980s as a part of ongoing operations at SSFL.
Pre-Test Building (Building 901)
The Pre-Test Building, used to prep engines prior to and after their testing, was located at the north end of the facility beyond VTS-2. It replaced an earlier preparation and test structure known as the “prep stand” which was in use between 1949 and circa-1955 (see Appendix A: Figure 15 & 16). The prep stand was used to assemble the engine, fuel and oxidizer tanks which were then moved to VTS using a large gantry crane, reputedly brought from Germany (DOC NO. 212TI000002: 5). Plans for the 62-foot by 28-foot prefabricated have an “as built” stamp of July 25, 1965. Set on a concrete slab foundation, the building included a large pretest room, office, toilet/locker room, tool crib and a power equipment area. The building appears to Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 18 have been one of a number of alterations and modifications made to the Bowl for the J-2 program. It was accessed via a narrow drive that extends past the building to a cluster of hydrogen tanks located to the north. The building was a one-story prefabricated building with a metal frame and corrugated metal siding and roof. It is capped by a moderately pitched side gable roof. The building was demolished sometime after 1974; only the concrete pad remains in place.
Observation Building (Building 933)
Located west of VTS-1 Building 933 is a 12-foot by 7-foot, 9-inch rectangular reinforced concrete building with a flat roof and 9-inch thick walls (Appendix C: Photograph 8). Two observation windows fitted with blast resistant glass are set on the north elevation. The building is accessed via a swing door on its west elevation. It was built in 1963 for the J-2 program. The interior has been stripped of its original equipment.
Steam Generator Control Building (Building 935)
Located behind VTS-3 this prefabricated metal building was installed in the early 1980s. It was associated with an experimental coal gasification project located in Bowl during the late 1970s and early 1980s (Appendix C: Photograph 9).
Horizontal Tank Pad
Set on the hillside east of VTS-1, this facility dates to the 1950s. It is composed of a 10 horizontal tanks which stored gaseous nitrogen, helium, gaseous hydrogen and other chemicals used to fuel and purge engines and control valves being tested at VTS-1.
Plume Study Area Building (Building 902)
The Plume Study Area building is set on the steep hillside that defines the east side of the Bowl. It is a rectangular reinforced concrete building with a flat roof and thick walls (Appendix C: Photograph 10). A construction date for this building could not be ascertained. A small test stand (now removed) and a number of concrete pads adjacent to this building were used as a fuel test facility. Given the location of this structure, it may have originally served as an observation bunker.
Bunkers (un-numbered)
Two small bunkers are located on the hillside behind the vertical test stands. These small, flat- roofed rectangular reinforced concrete buildings feature small windows that looked down onto the test stands (Appendix C: Photograph 11). During testing technicians in the bunkers would observe the vertical test stands for problems or malfunctions. The technicians would report any problems to the control center in Building 900. Later, cameras replace human observers.
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 19 Retention Pond/Reservoir
The test stands used copious amounts of water during their operation. Water was used to cool the flame bucket and wash down the test stands after each test firing. At each test stand water was channeled down gunnite or concrete-lined spillways to the bottom of the Bowl where it was stored in two ponds. Between 1949 and circa-1960 two ponds were located in the Bowl. The 200,000 gallon skim pond stored water used to cool the flame buckets used during testing. From the skim pond the water was pumped to the 3-million gallon retention pond and from there it was pump up to the test stands for reuse. Periodically water was pumped from the retention ponds to the R-1 reservoir located near the entrance to the Bowl. Reportedly the ponds were periodically burned-off to remove fuel residues. By 1960 the two ponds had been consolidated into one large retention pond with a smaller pond located near VTS-3. The small pond may have functioned as a catch basin for RP spillage. Sometime in the late 1970s the skim pond was paved over, most likely when the experimental coal gasification facility was built (Doc. No. 212TI000002: 5).
Offsite Lox Storage
A LOX storage facility was located at the intersection of Area I Road and the Bowl access road. It featured two or three horizontal tanks surrounded by a fence. The tanks were linked to Building 900 (Control Center) by a pipeline. This facility, which was built in 1961, has since been removed.
History:
Testing programs in the Bowl, between 1949 and the mid 1960s, were almost exclusively carried out for the military and were classified and records were often destroyed when a program ended. Consequently, few records have survived from this period. The Bowl, which was the first large scale test facility built at SSFL, was the location of one of the first American-designed and built rocket test stands. Completed in 1949, the Bowl’s first test stand is located in a natural depression surrounded by rocky outcroppings that soon became known as the Bowl (see Appendix B: Maps 4 and Map 5). Designated Prep Stand -1 it was activated in July of 1949. The new stand was first used in November 1949 when a 3,000-pound thrust test was carried out on an engine built from test equipment salvaged from NAA’s parking lot test facility in Inglewood (The ELS Globe: July/August 2003: Vol. 2.5; 1). In 1950 construction was completed on both Vertical Test Stand 1 (VTS-1), the first permanent rocket test stand at SSFL, as well as the control center (Building 900). It was followed in 1951 by HTS-1. VTS-2 was activated in 1953 and VTS-3 became operational in 1955. Engine testing at the Bowl supported the Redstone, Navaho, Atlas, H-1, and Saturn programs between 1948 and 1969 (see below for detailed information regarding the history of the individual test stands). Engines for the Thor missile, an Air Force program (1956-1979) and the Jupiter missile a U.S. Army program (1958-1963) were also tested at Bowl; however, it is not clear what test stand or test stands were used for these programs. The J-2/Saturn V engines for the Saturn program appear to have been the last large scale test program carried out at Bowl. A fairly extensive series of Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 20 plans for modifications to VTS-2 and VTS-3 for the J-2 program are on file at SSFL. Testing at Bowl appears to have ended during the early or mid-1970s. In 1978 Bowl became the site of an experimental coal gasification program, which remained in operation until 1995 (Appendix A: see Figure 17). Between 1975 and 1983 the Bowl was the used as a test area for coal gasification and coal liquefaction project. The last program at Bowl was valve testing at the Steam Accumulator Blowdown Evaluation Rig (SABER), which operated between 1988 and 1990.
Vertical Test Stand 1 (VTS-1) (Building 317)
Designed by American technicians and scientists, as well as German expatriate scientists, VTS- 1, was based to a large extent, on the German World War II test stands (The ELS Globe: July/August 2003: Vol. 2.5; 1). It should be noted that while the design of VTS-1 was inspired by German stands, it was not an exact copy. Constructed of poured-in place concrete, the test stand allowed the rocket engine, as well as the launch vehicle, to be tested in a vertical position. Construction began in 1949 and VTS-1 was activated in March of 1950. The stand was designed as part of a 2.3 million dollar program to design, test and manufacture the MX-770 rocket engine, a 75K, 500-mile range, supersonic boost-glide missile for the Army Air Force (Kraemer 2006: 29). Named the Navaho, the missile would be the first large scale rocket engine tested at SSFL. The first test at Bowl occurred on March 2, 1950. The thrust chamber test took place at a temporary stand using propellants from pressurized tanks (Kraemer 2006: 36). During the test the engine’s oxidizer dome shattered, resulting in an explosion of the thrust chamber (Kraemer 2006: 36-37). Eight months later, on November 15, 1950, the first large scale test in the United States of an American designed and manufactured main stage large liquid propellant rocket with turbo pumps took place when a 75K experimental XLR43- NA-1 rocket engine (an experimental configuration for the Redstone engine) was fired-up on VTS-1 in the Bowl (Kraemer 2006: 38). The rocket would remain on VTS-1 for six months undergoing more than 60 test firings. At the end of testing, the Navaho’s 75K engine was America’s first operational large scale liquid propellant rocket engine (Kraemer 2006: 38). Ironically, while the MX-770 was a success, its original purpose vanished when the Air Force, as a result of the Soviet Union’s successful testing of an atomic bomb, needed to increase the range for its missiles from 500 to 5,500 miles, which proved to be too great a range for the 75K engine (Kraemer 2006: 39).
In 1951 the Army’s Guided Missile Development Division awarded NAA a contract to develop the Redstone, a short range surface-to-surface ballistic missile that would use the 75K engine developed by NAA (American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics: Historic Aerospace Site, Rocketdyne Santa Susana Field Laboratory, Canoga Park, California, n.d.: 3). The Redstone, which was tested at VTS-1, later gained further prominence when in January 1958 the United States, in response to the Soviet Union’s successful launch of Sputnik, launched into orbit its first rocket, a multi-stage Redstone. Three years later in May of 1961, the Mercury program using a Redstone rocket, with a 75K engine, lifted into orbit the United State’s first astronaut, Alan Shepard, Jr. (Kraemer, 2006: 45). Subsequent programs associated with VTS-1 are outlined below in Table 5.1. The test stand was partially dismantled during the mid 1990s Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 21 as a part of ongoing operations at SSFL. Surviving remnants include the concrete core of the test stand, retaining walls and remnants of the concrete and gunnite-lined spillway in the base of the canyon. VTS-1, which was in active use between March of 1950 and the 1970s, tested rocket engines for the following programs:
TABLE 5.1 VTS-1 (Major Test Programs) Test Program Period of Testing Number of Tests Navaho G26 Engine, Air Force March 1951-unkown Unknown Redstone Engine, Army 1951-1956 270 Navajo 120K Thrust Chamber, Early 1954-late 1955 270 Air Force Atlas 135K Thrust Chamber, Air Sept 1955-Oct. 1955 8 Force Atlas 60K Thrust Chamber, Air October 1955-May 1956 145 Force Atlas S-4 Sustainer Research and July 1956-December 1957 232 Development, Air Force J-2 Engine (Saturn V), NASA 1960-unknown (testing unknown appears to have ended sometime in the early or mid 1970s).
Horizontal Test Stand 1 (HTS-1)
In 1951, a horizontal test stand (HTS-1) was built at the Bowl just east of VTS-1. It was initially designed to test horizontal engine starts for an Air Force program to air-start Navaho missiles that would be dropped from B-36 bombers (Kraemer 2006: 89). The test stand was activated in January of 1951. The first test at HTS-1 was for the Cook Test Sled in January of 1951. Later testing which spanned the period between 1951 and 1957 was for the Navaho and Atlas programs (Table 5.2). Testing at HTS-1 after 1965 could not be documented. The test stand superstructure and most of its substructure were removed in 1996 as a part of ongoing operations at SSFL. In 2009, only remnants of its substructure and gunnite-lined spillway survive.
(See Table 5.2, next page)
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 22 TABLE 5.2: HTS-1 (Major Test Programs) Test Program Period of Testing Number of Tests X-1 (NAA) Jan. 1951-unknown 71* Cook Sled Test, Air Force Jan. 1951-May 1952 99 Navajo 120K Thrust Chamber, Early 1954-late 1955 270 Air Force Atlas 5K Heat Transfer Study, Air Jan. 1956-March 1956 7 Force Atlas 135K Thrust Chamber, Air July5,1955-Dec.1957 618 Force Atlas 150K Thrust Chamber, Air April 1956-Dec. 1957 269 Force Atlas 60K Thrust Chamber, Air June1956-Dec.1957 350 Force Kiwi (NASA) Nov. 1965-unknown ? Citation: Notes: *The X-1 was developed by NAA’s Experimental Engines Group to develop and test advanced engine feature (doc. #212TI000002)
Vertical Test Stand 2 (VTS-2) (Structure 922)
In September 1953, two years after HTS-1 was activated, VTS-2, the second vertical test stand at the Bowl, was built and activated. Unlike VTS-1 the new stand was primarily constructed of steel rather than concrete. Using steel rather than concrete provided greater flexibility for subsequent modifications and allowed the stand to be constructed in a shorter period of time than concrete would have required. The Navaho G38 engine was the first tested on VTS-2. Testing for the J-2 Saturn V engine was also tested at VTS-2. Other rocket engine testing programs at VTS-2 could not be documented (Table 5.3). The stand was later modified for an experimental coal gasification program, which was active between circa 1977 and circa 1995. Most of the test stand’s original superstructure was removed by circa 1977. The remainder of the stand was removed in the mid-1990s as a part of ongoing operations at SSFL. In 2009, only remnants of its concrete substructure, an observation room and its gunnite-lined spillway survive.
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 23 TABLE 5.3: VTS-2 (Major Test Programs) Test Program Period of Testing Number of Tests Navaho G38 Engine, Air Force Sept. 1953-unknown unknown Atlas B-20, S-4, MA-1,2 &5, Air May 1955-1961 300* Force J-2 Engine (Saturn V), NASA 1960-? (testing appears to unknown have ended sometime in the early or mid 1970s). Saturn stage 2 & 3, NASA 1966-unknown unknown Notes: *300 total tests at VTS-1, 2 and 3
Vertical Test Stand 3 (VTS-3) (Structure 924)
In May of 1955, VTS-3, the fourth and final test stand at the Bowl was activated. Located east of VTS-1, the new test stand was similar in its overall design and appearance to VTS-2. Testing at VTS-3 supported the Navajo and Atlas programs between 1955 and 1957. The test stand was subsequently used for testing the J-2 rocket for the Saturn program (Table 5.4). After testing for the Saturn program ended in the mid-1960s, VTS-III was converted for use as the Central Receiver Solar Thermal Power System. This program, which ran from 1975 to 1976 used a large diesel-fired steam system to test a solar energy storage system. VTS-3 was converted into a steam valve test facility in 1988; this conversion included the removal of the upper section of the test stand’s superstructure. The facility was used as a steam valve test facility between 1988 and 1990. The remainder of the facility was demolished after 1996 as a part of ongoing operations at SSFL. Only remnants of its substructure and gunnite-lined spillway survive.
(see Table 5.4, next page)
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 24 TABLE 5.4: VTS-3 (Major Test Programs) Test Program Period of Testing Number of Tests Navajo Engine, Air Force May 1955-unknown Unknown Atlas B-1 Engine, Air Force July 1955-Sept. 1955 46 Atlas B-2A, & B-2c Engines Dec. 1956-April 1956 92 R&D, Air Force Atlas B-2C Engine, Air Force March 1956-Mar. 1957 156 Atlas B-3 Engine, Air Force March 1957-Dec. 1957 126 J-2 Engine (Altitude)/Saturn V, 1960 (testing appears to have unknown NASA ended sometime in the early or mid 1970s).
Building 900
The test cells in Building 900 were used for testing from 1949 to sometime in the 1960s. Testing programs at Building 900 are poorly documented; however, it is known that 5,656 tests of Venier rocket motors were completed for the Air Force and NASA between 1949 and the 1960s (Doc. No. 212-ER000001: 22) (Table 5.5).
TABLE 5.5: Control Center (Building 900) (Major Test Programs) Test Program Period of Testing Number of Tests Venier engines for Air Force & 1949-1960s 5656 NASA Navaho gas generators for Air Jan. 1956-July 1957 452 Force “Aircraft Assist.” Navy 1956-August 1958 21
6.0 IDENTIFICATION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES
6.1 Introduction
The former test stands and related features at Bowl were surveyed and evaluated. The current study focuses on resources at Bowl that were associated with research, development and testing programs carried out at the SSFL during the period of significance and do not include general infrastructure such as roads, culverts, pipelines or other general support facilities. The survey area was confined to the buildings, structures and features historically associated with the operation of the Bowl in Area I of the SSFL. Bowl has not been previously evaluated for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources.
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 25 The following section of the report evaluates the eligibility of the Bowl for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and/or for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. Bowl was also evaluated for listing as contributors to potential historic districts.
6.2 National Register of Historic Places Criteria
(A) Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or (B) Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or (C) Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or (D) Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
In addition, as noted in NPS Bulletin 22, Criterion Consideration G should be evaluated when considering a property’s eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Resources if it is less than 50 years of age, or the historic events associated with the resource occurred less than 50 years ago: (g) A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance (NPS, Bulletin 22: 1998).
Criterion Consideration G is applicable to the Bowl, because of its association with the United State’s defense and space programs during the period of significance for Santa Susana Field Laboratory’s Area I (1949 to 1988). This period spans the time when Bowl played a role in the research and development of rocket engines for the defense and space exploration programs, including the Navaho and Atlas engines used to power missiles, the first unmanned and manned orbital flights, the development of the Saturn J-2 rocket engine and Stage 2 and 3 of the Saturn program.
6.3 Historic Context and Identification of Historical Resources under National Register of Historic Places Criteria
The following section of the report identifies the major historic themes identified with the resources at the Bowl facility in Area I that were the focus of the current study.
Association with Defense Programs during the Cold War
As a consequence of the Cold War that developed between the United States and the Soviet Union in the late 1940s the nation embarked on an unprecedented program of military expansion that included new and innovative weaponry systems based on technological advances made during World War II. Particular attention was given to developing missiles that could deliver a nuclear payload over great distances. Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL) played an important role in this research and development program through the testing of rocket engines for the Navaho, Redstone, Atlas, Jupiter, and Thor missiles. A number of key firsts were associated with SSFL’s Area I tests stands, beginning with the first successful Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 26 vertical test of the 75K experimental XLR43-NA-1 engine and its main stage at a site at SSFL known as the Bowl on November 15, 1950. Later, the Jupiter rocket engine, a modified version of the Redstone engine, which powered the first American suborbital space flight in February 1958, was tested in Area I. SSFL also played a leading role in the development and testing of engines with bi-propellant fuel, an advance that allowed missiles, such as the Thor and Jupiter, to achieve a firing range of over 1,500 miles. These missiles, which were deployed to Europe, formed the basis for America’s initial defense response to the Soviet Union’s development of nuclear missiles. The technology and engineering attained by these early missile programs formed the basis for the development of the United State’s nuclear arsenal. The period of significance for SSFL during the Cold War era extends from 1949 to 1991. Because the SSFL including Area I played a leading role in the development and testing of rocket engine technology for the United State’s defense programs from 1949 until 1991 it meets the level of exceptional importance required for resources that have achieved significance within the last 50 years (www.nps.gov/history/nr/bulletins/nrb22).
Association with American Space Programs
The Bowl facility in Area I of SSFL has been associated with research and development for the American Space program since the first Navaho rocket engine was tested in the Bowl in 1949. The Navaho was a precursor to the modified Jupiter engine (also tested at SSFL) which powered the launch of Explorer 1 in 1958, the first United States satellite to discover the earth’s radiation belts. Engines and engine components for the Mercury and Gemini programs, including the Atlas rocket engine, which powered the launch of the Atlas rocket that sent John Glenn into space in 1964, were tested at SSFL. Subsequent programs carried out under the auspices of NASA included research, development testing and building of engines for the Saturn rockets, the H-1 engine for the Saturn I and IB, the J-2 engine for the Saturn IV, and the F-1 Engine for the Saturn V. These engines powered the rockets for the Apollo manned flights that reached the moon and Skylab. Later, between the early 1970s and the late 1980s, research development and testing of the main stage rocket engines for the Space Shuttle, the first reusable space vehicle, were tested at in Area I. The period of significance for this theme at SSFL encompasses the period between 1949 and 1988, the last year when large scale testing for the SSME program ended. The historic significance of the American Space program was established in a theme study, Man in Space, published by the National Park Service in 1984. Because SSFL and Area I played a leading role in the development and testing of rocket engine technology for virtually all of United State’s space programs, between 1949 and the late 1980s, it meets the level of exceptional importance required for resources that have achieved significance within the last 50 years (www.nps.gov/history/nr/bulletins/nrb22).
Association with the Post World War II Transformation of Southern California
North American Aviation and its SSFL has a direct association with the development of California’s post World War II economy, an economy dominated by the defense and aerospace industries from the late 1940s through the early 1990s. Beginning in the postwar period, the federal government began funding a massive program of defense-related research and Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 27 development to contain the spread of Soviet influence. During this period southern California played a leading role in its buildup. The state’s already sizeable number of aerospace firms (largely developed during World War II) and concentration of academic and scientific institutions, such as the California Institute of Technology, the University of California, Berkeley, and Stanford University, were important components in helping defense-related programs move forward quickly (Rice, William and Orsi 2002: 497-499). By the 1960s, defense firms, such as Douglas, Litton Industries, Lockheed, and North American Aviation (including its Atomics International and Rocketdyne subdivisions), were employing tens-of- thousands of workers and accounting for 60 percent of the manufacturing workforce in Los Angeles and Orange Counties (Rice, William and Orsi 2002: 498-499). The subsequent creation of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), whose West Coast headquarters was at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, greatly increased the ability of California to obtain government contracts, resulting in an enormous boon to the state’s economy. Significant scientific advances in programs undertaken by these institutions and companies allowed the development of sophisticated weaponry systems, including rockets, missiles, jets, and space-based electronic modules.
Attracting large numbers of well-paid factory workers, engineers, technicians, and scientists, the defense and aerospace industry helped to account for a dramatic increase in the state’s population, and an unprecedented suburbanization of California’s landscape, exemplified by areas, such as the San Fernando Valley. Comprised largely of farm and ranching land as late as the early 1940s, the San Fernando Valley began to demographically transform in the postwar period from a rural environment, to an area of middle-class residential housing tracts and commercial strip malls. To address California’s rapid influx in population, a large number of whom were attracted by jobs in the aerospace and defense-related industries, the state launched the greatest build-up of its public infrastructure in its history, constructing new schools, universities, libraries, and parks, and building hundreds of miles of roads, highways, and freeways. North American Aviation, as one of the largest defense-related contractors, played a significant role in this post World War II transformation of California from a prewar economy, based largely on agriculture and extractive industries, to a postwar economy dominated by the defense and aerospace industry. Therefore, as part of this defense-related industry, the SSFL has a significant association with this historic theme, namely the transformation of California’s economy in the post World War II period.
6.4 Evaluation of Bowl for listing as a Significant Historic Resource
The following section of the report applies the significance criteria outlined in Section 3 of this report to determine the eligibility of surveyed resources for listing in the National Register of Historic Places either as individual resources or contributors to a national register-eligible historic district. Detailed descriptions of the resources evaluated in this section of the report can be found in Section 5.2. Bowl is composed of a discrete cluster of resources whose individual buildings, structures and features are related by function, design and historical use. Therefore, it will be evaluated for potential listing as an individual historic district.
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 28 6.4.1 The Bowl
The Bowl was the first vertical test stand complex built at the SSFL and one of the first complexes of its type in the United States. It was composed of three vertical test stands (VTS-1, VTS-2, VTS-3a/3b) that tested engines for the Navaho, Atlas and Saturn (J-2 programs). Engine testing at Bowl spanned the period between 1949 and the mid-1960s. With the close of rocket engine testing at the Bowl the facility was used for a number of projects, including an experimental solar energy storage program. This program, which ran from 1975 to 1976, used a large diesel-fired steam system to test a solar energy storage system. Between 1988 and 1990 VTS-3 was converted into a steam valve test facility and in 1988; this conversion included the removal of the upper section of the test stand’s superstructure. These projects also resulted in modifications to other features at the Bowl, including tanks stands, retention ponds, and test and instrumentation equipment. Beginning in 1996 the remainder of the Bowl was either dismantled (VTS-2 and VTS-3) or partially dismantled (the concrete core of VTS-1 remains in place). The control house and test cells in Building 900 were stripped of their equipment and instrumentation and partially demolished. The pretest building (Building 901) was dismantled and removed. Remaining elements of the complex include the concrete core of VTS-1, the stripped and partially demolished Control Center (Building 900), the Observation Building (Building 933), Steam Generator Control Building (Building 935), a horizontal tank pad, the Plume Study Area Building (Building 902), and two concrete bunkers. One of these resources, Building 902 was built the 1980s and is not associated with rocket engine testing.
The evaluation of integrity is based on the condition of the facility at the time of the onsite survey in July through August of 2009.
Location: Surviving remnants of Bowl have remained in place since the first phase of construction was completed in 1949. Therefore, Bowl has retained its integrity of location.
Design: Alterations made to Bowl between 1949 and the mid 1960s supported rocket engine testing at the SSFL. Those alterations that were made during the period when the facility was used primarily as a static rocket engine test facility and do not detract from the resource’s integrity of design. Alterations carried out after the mid 1960s have had a negative impact on the resource’s integrity of design since they have removed significant elements of the complex including virtually all of VTS II and VTS III and the steel superstructure of VTS I. In addition to these changes the control house has been partially demolished and its interior completely stripped of its equipment, instrumentation, doors and windows. What survives today is the shell of the control building, and the concrete base of VTS I as well as several small concrete observation bunkers. In its current state of preservation the original function of the facility is difficult to discern. Therefore, Bowl has not retained its integrity of design.
Setting: At the time of the survey, the setting of Bowl had maintained its ability to convey its historic appearance. Because the vicinity of Bowl had retained its historic Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 29 appearance, it has retained its integrity of setting.
Materials: Bowl has not been retained in a good state of preservation, and two important elements of the original complex namely, VTS II and VTS III have been almost entirely demolished. Only the concrete core of VTS I survives and the control house has been stripped of its doors and windows, part of its exterior walls and all of its interior fittings. Because the buildings, structures and features that compose Bowl have not retained their physical integrity the facility has not retained its integrity of materials.
Workmanship: As partially demolished structures VTS I and the control house cannot effectively convey the original character of their construction. Therefore, Bowl has not retained its integrity of workmanship.
Feeling: With the partial demolition of VTS II and III and the partial demolition of VTS I and the control house Bowl has not retained its integrity of design, setting, materials, workmanship and setting. Therefore, Bowl, which has not retained its overall integrity, cannot effectively express its historic function and association with rocket engine testing in Area I of the SSFL during the period of significance. Therefore, Bowl has not retained its integrity of feeling.
Association: Bowl, as the first operational vertical test stand at the SSFL and as the site of several historically significant early rocket engine tests has a direct association with the historic themes identified for Area I of the SSFL, which included static rocket engine and engine component development, and testing.
Significance Evaluation
Bowl will be evaluated as a unit rather than as individual components since they were built as part of a single program and were for the most part, meant to function together.
Bowl was historically composed of three test stands, a control house a number of observation bunkers, retention ponds and other features which were associated with the operation of Bowl between 1949 and the mid 1960s. It should be noted that the integrity of the Bowl has been severely compromised by the complete demolition of VTS-II and VTS-III, the partial demolition of VTS-1 and the partial demolition of the control house (Building 900). While elements of VTS-1 remain in place, its ability to convey its purpose and function has been severely compromised by the loss of the stand’s metal superstructure’s and instrumentation.
Criterion (A) Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history: Bowl was one of the first large scale permanent metal and concrete vertical test stands built in the United States. As constructed in 1949 it featured a concrete control house and concrete and steel test stand whose design was informed by test and launch Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 30 facilities developed by Germany during World War II. Bowl was one of five vertical test stand facilities at the SSFL, with Canyon in Area I and four test stands in the AFP facility in Area II. Bowl was the site of important early testing for the Redstone and Navajo programs in 1949 and 1950. While the concrete and steel design of VTS-1 was not repeated in later test stands which featured all steel construction, it does represent the earliest large scale vertical test stand built in the United States. VTS-1 was shortly followed by two additional test stands. The facility’s control center was, like VTS I, built in 1949. As noted above the facility underwent an extensive series of alterations beginning in the 1970s that removed VTS-2 and VTS-3 and partially demolished VTS-1 and the control house. These alterations were intended to allow the facility to be re-used for a coal gasification program that was unrelated to rocket engine testing programs or defense related research and development. Because of these alterations Bowl can no longer effectively convey its early and important role in the rocket testing programs. This is in contrast to the Alfa, Coca and Bravo test stand areas in Area II, which also date to the 1950s, but have maintained the inventory of buildings, structures. features and equipment associated with their historic use and function as static engine test stands and were consequently found eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (2009: Archaeological Consultants, Inc. and Weitze Research). Therefore, neither Bowl, nor VTS-1 or the Control House (Building 900) are eligible for listing as a significant historic resource in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A as individual resources or as a part of a larger designation encompassing the Bowl facility.
(B) Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past: Because the Bowl facility has not retained its integrity of design, materials, workmanship and feeling it cannot effectively convey the association of those scientists or engineers associated with the early testing programs carried out at Bowl, most notably Wernher von Braun and Bill Bollay. Therefore, Bowl does not meet Criterion B.
(C) Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction: Bowl was constructed of industrial materials such as reinforced concrete and steel. Its design in regards to the vertical test stands and control house represented at the time of their construction an innovative engineering accomplishment that represented the first large scale permanent vertical test stand built and designed in the United States. However, beginning in the 1970s the vertical test stands were altered. Later, in the mid 1990s they were demolished. Other elements of the historic complex such as the control house built in 1949 were partially demolished and stripped of their original instrumentation. These alterations were not related to historically significant research or testing programs. Because of these changes Bowl cannot convey its original appearance, function or status as one of the United States’ first permanent vertical test stand facilities. Therefore neither the Bowl complex as a whole, VTS-1 or the Control Building meets Criterion C.
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 31 Summary Statement of Eligibility:
Given the extensive nature of dismantling and demolition activities at the facility, and the condition of the surviving elements of the complex, Bowl facility can no longer effectively convey its historic appearance or associations with the history of rocket engine testing at the SSFL between 1949 and the mid 1960s, and is therefore, not eligible for listing as a significant historic resource in the National Register of Historic Places. Bowl is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A, B, or C. VTS-1 and the Control House (Building 900) are not individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A, B, or C.
6.4.2 Potential Historic District
Historic districts are usually defined as discrete clusters of resources that are linked historically, culturally or through their architecture, design or pattern of development. Historic districts can be composed of resources that are not individually eligible for listing, but in their totality form a significant entity that can effectively convey those associations that make them historically significant. Resources within a district are classified as contributing or non-contributing. Contributing resources embody those visual or historical associations that have been identified for the district. Non-contributors are resources that do not embody those types of associations or no longer retain sufficient integrity to convey those associations.
6.4.2.1 Bowl
As noted in Section 6.4.1 of this report the Bowl facility does not retain sufficient integrity to convey its appearance during the period of significance or its important historic associations. Therefore, Bowl is not eligible for listing as a historic district. Neither can it contribute to a larger historic district that would encompass other resources in Area I.
6.4.3 Eligibility for Listing in the California Register of Historical Resources
The Bowl facility in its current state of preservation with VTS 2 and VTS demolished down to their footings VTS 1 reduced to its concrete core and the control building gutted and partially demolished, lacks sufficient integrity for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. It also lacks sufficient integrity for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources.
7.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Bowl is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources because it lacks sufficient integrity to convey its historic associations and appearance. In addition, Bowl is not eligible for designation as a historic district because its constituent elements no longer retain sufficient integrity to convey their historic associations or appearance.
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 32 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND RESOURCES CONSULTED IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT
Anonymous n.d. The Hill: Santa Susana Field Laboratory
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 2001 The Rocketdyne Santa Susana Field Laboratory, Canoga Park, California
Archaeological Consultants, Inc. and Weitze Research 2009 Historic Resources Survey and Assessment of the NASA Facility at Santa Susana Field. Prepared for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Calvit, Elizabeth 2006 Technical Memorandum, Santa Susana Field Laboratory Preliminary Building Assessment for Historical Significance: Prepared for Allen Elliot, NASA. CH2M Hill- NOW, February 17, 2006.
Forsyth, Kevin S. 2002 Delta: The Ultimate Thor. In Roger Launius and Dennis Jenkins (Eds.), To Reach The High Frontier: A History of U.S. Launch Vehicles. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.
Gibson, James N. 1996 The Navaho Missile Project: The Story of the "Know-How" Missile of American Rocketry. Schiffer Publishing Ltd.
Gidney, C. M., et al. 1917 History of Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo and Ventura Counties, California, Volume II. Chicago: The Lewis Publishing Company.
Hyder, A.K. 2000 Spacecraft Power Technologies. London, Imperial College Press.
King, Thomas F. 1998 Cultural Resource Laws and Practice: An Introductory Guide. Walnut Creek: Alta Mira Press
Kraemer, Robert S. 2000 Beyond the Moon: A Golden Age of Planetary Exploration. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 33 2006 Rocketdyne: Powering Humans into Space. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
MWH
February 2009 Group IA-Northeastern Portion of Area I, RCRA Facility Investigations Report, Santa Susana Field Laboratory, Ventura County, California. Prepared for the Boeing Company. MWH 618 Michillinda Avenue, Suite 200, Arcadia, CA 91007:
Volume I-Text, Tables, and Figures.
Volume II-RFI Site Reports, Appendix A, B-1 Area (SWMU 4.1 and Area 1 AOC).
Volume III-RFI Site Reports, Appendix B, Instrumentation and Equipment Laboratories (SWMUs 4.3, 4.4 and AOC).
Volume VI-RFI Site Reports: Appendix E: Happy Valley North (Area I AOC).
Volume VII-RFI Site Reports: Appendix F: Happy Valley South (Area I AOC).
Volume VIII-RFI Site Reports: Appendix G: Advanced Propulsion Test Facility (SWMUs 4.9, 4.10, 4.11, and AOC).
Volume X-RFI Site Reports, Appendix I, Canyon Area (SWMUs 4.14, 4.18 and AOCs).
Neufeld, Jacob. 1996 The Rocket and the Reich: Peenemünde and the Coming of the Ballistic Era. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Third printing, 1999
Planning and Human Systems, Inc. 1987 Atomic Power in Space: A History. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.
Post/Hazeltine Associates 2009 Historic Resource Assessment for Area IV, Santa Susana Field Laboratory, Ventura County, California.
Rice, Richard B., William A. Bullough and Richard J. Orsi 2002 The Elusive Eden: A New History of California. McGraw Hill, Boston.
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 34 Starr, Kevin, 1985 Inventing the Dream: California Through the Progressive Era. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
1990 Material Dreams: Southern California Through the 1920s. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
1996 Endangered Dreams: The Great Depression in California. New York. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sapere Consulting, Inc. and Boeing Company, 2005 Historical Site Assessment of Area IV, SSFL, Ventura County, California; http://www.etec.energy.gov/Reading-Room/Historical-Site-Assessment.html
State of California 1998 California Environmental Quality Act: CEQA guideline revisions, October 26, 1998.
Triem Judith, P. 1985 Ventura County, Land of Good Fortune: An Illustrated History by Judith P. Triem. Chatsworth, California: Windsor Publications, Inc.
United States Department of Energy (DOE) no date SNAP Overview, ETEC Closure Project, DOE website http://www.etec.energy.gov/History/Major-Operations/SNAP-Overview.html United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service (NPS)
1983 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. F8 Fed. Reg. (Federal Register) 44716-68.
1992 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Brochure, Preservation Assistance Division, Washington, D.C.
1984 Preservation Briefs 36: Protecting Cultural Landscapes: Planning, Treatment, and Management of Historic Landscapes. Charles A. Birnbaum, ASLA.
1996 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships, Heritage Preservation Services, Historic Landscape Initiative. Washington, D.C.
1983 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Federal Agency Historic Preservation Programs under Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 63 Fed Reg. 20495-20508.
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 35 1989 National Register Bulletin 30: Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes (Revised 1999).
1990 National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (Revised 1997).
Personal Communication
Paul Costa, December, 2009 Steve Dember, August, 2009 John Halchek, November, 2009
Post Hazeltine Associates Revised Draft Historic Resource Evaluation Report for the Bowl Facility in Area I of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory August 3, 2010 36 APPENDIX A
Figures
(Historical Photographs) Figure 1 Bowl Area Control Center (under construction) Photo taken: 1949 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company)
Figure 2 Bowl Area Propellant Test Control Center (under construction), Temporary test stand in background Photo taken: 1949 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company) Figure 3 Bowl Area Propellant Test Control Center (under construction) Photo taken: 1949 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company)
Figure 4 Bowl Area Propellant Test Control Center (under construction) Photo taken: 1949 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company) Figure 5 Bowl, SSFL Bowl Area Prep Stand (temporary test stand) Photo taken: 1949 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company) Figure 6 Bowl, SSFL Bowl Test Area Photo taken: 1950 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company) Figure 7 Bowl, SSFL Bowl Area Control Center and VTS #1 (under construction) Photo taken: 1949 Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company
Figure 8 Bowl, SSFL VTS #1 (under construction) Photo taken: 1949 Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company Figure 9 Bowl, SSFL Bowl Control Center Photo taken: 1955 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company)
VTS #2 (built 1953)
Figure 10 Bowl, SSFL Aerial of Bowl Photo taken: 1958 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company) Figure 11 Bowl, SSFL VTS-1 (under construction) Photo taken: 1949 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company) Figure 12 Bowl, SSFL Navaho Engine Thrust Chamber Hot Fire Test on VTS-1 Photo taken: 1950 Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company Figure 13 Bowl, SSFL Bowl Area First Full Thrust Pump Fed Engine Hot Firing Photo taken: 1950 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company) Figure 14 Bowl, SSFL VTS-3 (built 1955) with Altitude Chamber Installed Photo taken: 1962 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company) Figure 15 Bowl, SSFL Aerial view of Bowl Photo taken: 1975 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company)
Figure 16 Bowl, SSFL Aerial view of Bowl Photo taken: 1977 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company) Figure 17 Bowl, SSFL Bowl Test Area Photo taken: 1993 (Photo courtesy of The Boeing Company) APPENDIX B
Maps Santa Susana Field Laboratory
N
Map1 Regional Location Map For the Santa Susana Field Laboratory, Ventura County, California Project Area
Map 2 Santa Susana Field Laboratory Location Map for Bowl Area 4
N
Area 3 Area 2 Area 1
Map 3 Map of the SSFL Depicting Areas 1 – 4 (Areas I – IV) (The Boeing Company) Area I Road
Bowl N
Map 4 Map of the SSFL Depicting Area I (The Boeing Company) Area I Road
Building 900 (Control Center)
VTS III
VTS II VTS I
N
Map 5 Area I Site Plan for Bowl (Boeing Company) APPENDIX C
Photographs
(existing conditions at the time of survey) Photograph #1 The Bowl Looking east toward VTS I and VTS II Photo: Post/Hazeltine Associates (2009)
Photograph # 2 The Bowl Looking east toward VTS III Photo: Post/Hazeltine Associates (2009) Photograph # 3 The Bowl Looking north toward Building 900 Photo: Post/Hazeltine Associates (2009)
Photograph # 4 The Bowl Looking south toward VTS I Photo: Post/Hazeltine Associates (2009) Photograph #5 The Bowl Looking east towards VTS I Photo: Post/Hazeltine Associates (2009)
Photograph #6 The Bowl North elevation of Building 900 (looking northeast) Photo: Post/Hazeltine Associates (2009) Photograph #7 The Bowl Building 900 (interior) Photograph #8 The Bowl Building 933 (Observation Building) West elevation Photo: Post/Hazeltine Associates (2009)
Photograph #9 The Bowl Building 935 (Steam Generator Building) West elevation Photo: Post/Hazeltine Associates (2009) Photograph #10 The Bowl Plume Study Building (south elevation, looking north) Photo: Post/Hazeltine Associates (2009)
Photograph #11 The Bowl Bunker (looking east) Photo: Post/Hazeltine Associates (2009)