![](SFGov Superior Court Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, released June 2002_files/hrule.gif) Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, released June
2002
![adult_probation](SFGov Superior Court Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, released June 2002_files/letter.gif)
View
the letter in PDF format This file is provided in PDF format,
and you must have the Adobe Acrobat Reader to access it. Click
here for information about obtaining Acrobat.
HUNTERS
POINT NAVAL SHIPYARD
GLOSSARY
ATSDR - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry (federal) BRAC - Base Realignment and Closure Act
(federal) BVHP - Bayview Hunters Point CAC - Mayor's Hunters
Point Citizen's Advisory Committee CERCLA - Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (federal) -
known popularly as "Superfund" CGJ -Civil Grand Jury (San
Francisco) City - San Francisco City and County DOD - (U.S.)
Department of Defense DEnv - Department of the Environment (San
Francisco) DPH - Department of Public Health (San
Francisco) FFA - Federal Facilities Agreement FOST - Finding
of Suitability to Transfer HPS - Hunters Point Naval
Shipyard HPSRP - Hunters Point Shipyard Redevelopment Plan MOA
- Memorandum of Agreement MOED - Mayor's Office of Economic
Development NPL - National Priorities List PAC - Project Area
Committee RAB - Restoration Advisory Board SFRA - San
Francisco Redevelopment Agency
TERMINOLOGY
Superfund - the federal law known as CERCLA
sustainable development - meeting the economic
development, community revitalization and environmental needs of the
present without sacrificing the ability of future generations to
meet these needs.
Table Of
Contents
Glossary Overview Background Investigative
Process Findings
And Recommendations Attachments
OVERVIEW
Throughout southeast San Francisco's Bayview Hunters
Point (BVHP) community there has been much controversy, fear, and
often misinformation surrounding the protracted and difficult
process of preparing for the transfer of the former Hunters Point
Naval Shipyard (HPS) to the City and County of San Francisco (City)
and to the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency (SFRA), under the
federal Base Realignment and Closure Act (BRAC). HPS, in a prime
urban location along San Francisco Bay, must never again experience
the environmental degradation of past uses. Because of the
importance of the site to the City, and the length of time it has
taken to meet schedules for the property clean up and transfer, the
Civil Grand Jury (CGJ) sought to clarify information related to this
site.
Community distrust of the public agencies charged with
managing the clean up, turnover, and development of this prime real
estate is the result of -
-
incomplete information
-
complex toxic testing requirements
-
unexplained fires
-
failure to study and/or explain cluster illnesses
among nearby long- term residents
-
lack of a robust local hiring program
-
escalating costs
-
missed deadlines.
CGJ found that - under BRAC and the federal Superfund
law (i.e., the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act [CERCLA]) - the transfer negotiations and toxic
clean up are progressing in a more orderly and controlled manner
than public perception would indicate. Recently federal, state, and
City agencies have begun working jointly to remedy the gaps in
public information and continue to solicit and act upon community
input. Congressional support has secured additional clean-up funding
for the Department of Defense (DOD) and local, federal, and
community leaders are working to hasten the clean up and
transfer.
With these encouraging changes in an oft-delayed
process, the CGJ is making recommendations to those governmental
entities in San Francisco which are central to the work on this
multi-faceted effort:
-
Board of Supervisors
-
Department of the Environment (DEnv)
-
Department of Public Health (DPH)
-
Mayor's Office of Economic Development
(MOED)
-
San Francisco Redevelopment Agency
(SFRA)
CGJ recommends that the City -
-
Establish a clearinghouse for information on jobs,
serving both employers and potential employees. Such a
clearinghouse should coordinate with all other City resources to
identify training needs and possible programs.
-
Create a central public information office to
provide up-to-date progress reports and to bridge information gaps
between public advisory boards and federal and local community
bodies.
-
Make certain that future developers' plans include
an economic commitment and priority consideration for industrial
development which will provide jobs for southeast sector
residents, before, or in conjunction with the residential
development. Placing the first priority on economic development
will give BVHP job seekers the chance to earn steady incomes early
enough to be capable and ready to purchase some of the anticipated
new housing.
-
Using commonly accepted scientific techniques,
document and evaluate any evidence of clustered environmental
illnesses among residents of BVHP and compare that data with
similar communities near other Superfund sites. The DPH should
identify what testing or monitoring can be done, with reliance on
federal and state expertise and information.
-
Demonstrate commitment to environmental compliance
and pollution prevention by ensuring that no aspect of the reuse
of HPS will endanger the health and well-being of the BVHP
community. HPS should be a model of sustainable development in
both residential and industrial reuse
BACKGROUND
HPS has a legacy of toxic contamination, including
radioactive waste.
The HPS site was established in the 1860s as the
Pacific Coast's first dry dock. The use of the installation by the
Navy - to construct, maintain, and repair ships - began in 1919; the
Navy purchased the site in 1939. The Shipyard was equipped to pull a
90,000-ton aircraft carrier out of the water for maintenance.
During WWII and the 1950s, the Navy's activities at
HPS included decontamination and disposition (including sandblasting
the hulls of surface ships and submarines) of ships which were
exposed to radiation during the nuclear weapons tests in the South
Pacific. Operations at the facility over many decades generated a
wide variety of liquid and solid wastes. As the shipyard was
expanded, the adjacent Hunters Point ridge, a serpentine rock
formation, was cut down to fill the shoreline, and that fill
contains some naturally occurring toxins.
The facility was used for naval ordnance training
exercises, radiological defense research, and research on human
exposure to radioactive fallout. It housed the Naval Radiological
Defense Laboratory which studied nuclear weapons effects and was
operational from 1946 until 1969.
From 1976 to 1987, the site was leased to a private
enterprise, which eventually was charged and convicted by federal
authorities of numerous violations of laws pertaining to safeguards
for toxic substances.
In 1989, the site was placed on the federal
government's National Priorities List (NPL) of the nation's worst
toxic sites.
In 1991, the DOD selected HPS for closure. In 1993,
pursuant to BRAC, plans for transferring the property to the City
began. The Hunters Point Shipyard Redevelopment Plan, dated July 14,
1997, provides the framework for reuse and development and divides
the entire site into six parcels (A-F) in order to expedite clean up
and transfer to the City.
Various events have contributed to the community's
concerns and mistrust -
-
undisclosed landfill fires
-
previously undetected radioactive contamination
and toxic gas releases
-
missed deadlines
-
lack of clear and available information about the
contamination conditions on the site.
Environmental and health concerns, as well as economic
vitality and community involvement, provide challenges to all
parties involved in the base closure and reuse processes at HPS.
The preparation for turnover of HPS to civilian use is
complex. Under federal regulations, the City government is not a
party to the 1992 Federal Facilities Agreement (FFA) which sets
forth clean-up schedules and mandates actions by the involved
regulatory agencies:
-
(California) Department of Toxic Substances
Control
-
(California) Regional Water Quality Control
Board
-
U.S. Department of Defense
-
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-
U.S. Navy
Implementation of the HPS Redevelopment Project hinges
upon the successful environmental remediation efforts by the Navy
and the regulatory agencies.
The Navy and the City signed a Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) on November 3, 2000, (amended on January 23, 2002) to clarify
issues related to the clean up and transfer, and to set forth a
schedule for the process. Partial conveyance of the property, by
parcel, was authorized in a 1997 Congressional "early transfer"
decision that allows the military to transfer land before completing
the Superfund clean-up process. A "Finding of Suitability to
Transfer" (FOST) is a public process which requires consent of
regulatory agencies and full public hearings. Public comment on the
FOST (Revision 2) for Parcel A, ended on May 28, 2002. If approved
by the City, transfer is expected by the end of this year.
In November 2000, San Francisco voters approved a
Declaration of Policy (Proposition P) which expressed concerns about
the clean up of the toxic contamination at HPS. The Board of
Supervisors passed Resolution 634-01 on July 30, 2001, adopting
Prop. P as official City policy for the environmental remediation of
HPS, and calling for the prompt and thorough clean up of the
Shipyard.
Community acceptance is one of the Superfund's guiding
criteria for selecting clean-up remedies. The community-involvement
process pursuant to federal base closure requirements establishes a
Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) to address issues related to clean
up. The Navy is the lead agency for the RAB which includes local,
state, federal, community organization representatives, and local
residents. Another community involvement group, the Mayor's Hunter
Point Shipyard Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), is actively
involved in the planning process for reuse of the site. A third
group, the Project Area Committee (PAC) led by the Redevelopment
Agency, will oversee all HPS development and planning issues for the
greater southeast sector of the City. SFRA selected Lennar/BVHP as
the master developer for the site and negotiations for that contract
are in progress. It will be at least mid-2004 or 2005 before
infrastructure is in place and development construction projects
begin.
The toxic clean-up effort has cost over $225 million
and is not finished. It has been plagued by unexpected events and
discoveries (including unreported landfill fires, toxic gas
releases, suspected underground migrations, and radioactive
contamination).
The Navy estimates that all remedial actions at all
parcels will be complete by 2007.
Current plans for transfer of the parcels and proposed
reuses pursuant to the 1997 SFRA's Hunters Point Shipyard
Redevelopment Plan are -
Parcel A (88 acres) - proposed transfer by the end
of 2002 former use - mainly military housing proposed reuse
- residential
Parcel B (66 acres) - proposed transfer by the end
of 2003 former use - industrial, commercial, and
office proposed reuse - mixed use which may include
residential
Parcel C (79 acres) - will not be ready for transfer
until 2004 or 2005 former use - maritime, industrial,
commercial proposed reuse - industrial, and research and
development (may include residential)
Parcel D (125 acres) - may be ready for transfer in
2003 former use - industrial, commercial, office,
maritime proposed reuse - primarily industrial (may include
residential)
Parcel E (135 acres) - undergoing additional
studies; a feasibility study is expected by 2003; estimated
transfer date is 2004 or 2005 former use - open space and
landfil proposed reuse - primarily open space and industrial
(may include mixed use for research and development, and
residential).
Parcel F (443 acres of underwater property in San
Francisco Bay) - undergoing additional studies; estimated transfer
date: 2004 or later. former use - maritime proposed reuse -
maritime
INVESTIGATIVE
PROCESS
Interviews were conducted with representatives from
-
Mayor's Office of Economic Development San
Francisco Redevelopment Agency San Francisco Port
Commission Mayor's Hunters Point Citizen's Advisory
Committee San Francisco Department of Public Health San
Francisco Department of the Environment Bayview Hunters Point
Community Advocate ArcEcology Communities for a Better
Environment Restoration Advisory Board the BVHP
community
Reference materials (See Attachment 1) were reviewed
and discussed.
FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Finding
1
RAB, CAC, and PAC do not work together and do not have
a direct process for communication. This lack of a coordinated
communications mechanism weakens the information flow to the
community, and often leads to disorganized and ineffective public
outreach efforts. This situation contributes to community mistrust
and a lack of understanding of issues, including knowledge about
progress and positive efforts toward reuse.
Recommendation 1
The City should immediately establish a permanent
economic development and public information office, and should
locate this office at the gates to the shipyard. (CGJ notes that
Building 19 is of a size and location suitable for this purpose.)
This office should act as a clearinghouse to facilitate information
and communication between employers and job seekers, and to provide
referrals to sources for technical training, as well as for business
education and financing. This center could serve as the hub for
obtaining progress reports, media releases, information, and notices
of site tours, as well as providing space for community
outreach.
Required Responses -
-
Board of Supervisors - 90 days
-
Mayor's Office of Economic Development - 60
days
-
San Francisco Redevelopment Agency - 60
days
Finding
2
The development of HPS - bordered by one of the most
economically depressed areas of San Francisco - could bring jobs and
economic benefit to the community. There need to be strong
assurances that BVHP residents are not locked out of the jobs,
contracts, and ownership that are part of the development of homes
and businesses. Some efforts have been made to encourage local
training and hiring by on-site contractors; however, these efforts
should be strengthened. Jobs in the planned industrial development
at HPS would provide the means for some BVHP residents to afford
homes in the planned residential developments
Recommendation 2a
Policies and Objectives 18 and 19 - as proposed in the
HPS Area Plan of the General Plan of the City and County of San
Francisco, Draft, April 8, 1997 - i.e., "Provide employment,
business and entrepreneurial opportunities for Bayview Hunters Point
residents and businesses" and "Provide education and job training
opportunities for Bayview Hunter Point residents," must be
implemented. The City should ensure job availability for BVHP
residents - at both industrial and residential developments at HPS -
and commit to accessibility of business and affordable residential
opportunities. The parcel-by-parcel conveyance and development
should proceed only with an understanding of the interrelationships
of the development and reuse of the parcels. Economic development
should be timed so that BVHP workers are able to afford some of the
new housing in their community.
Required Responses -
Recommendation 2b
The MOA between the Navy and the City should be
amended to include training and hiring for the community to ensure
employment in clean-up and development activities.
Required Responses -
Finding
3
Concerning the nature and extent of health hazards at
HPS, there appears to be no agreement among DPH, the Federal and
State agencies, community organizations, and the media. Direct
communication among all governmental agencies needs strengthening.
Lack of complete data and incomplete documentation of the extent of
toxics (known as "site characterization") exacerbates the level of
community mistrust. The Navy has recently (March 2002) released a
draft of an assessment report on the historical programs of the
former Naval Radiological Laboratory at HPS, which is suspected of
careless handling of radioactive materials. Full public vetting of
this report has not occurred.
Recommendation 3
DPH should review what testing and monitoring of the
HPS site has been completed or is underway, and should identify what
additional evaluations must be made. Using federal and state
expertise and information, the City should work with the Navy and
environmental regulators to review available test data in
determining whether collection, ventilation, and/or treatment
systems are warranted at the site. Further, the City should clarify
issues, such as -
-
what effect the cap on the landfill has had on
pathways for methane gas and/or other contaminants or
compounds
-
whether public health and/or the environment
might be adversely impacted by the landfill cap.
DEnv, MOED and SFRA should work with the Navy and
environmental regulators to complete a comprehensive site
characterization. A clear schedule for this effort should be
provided to the public. A full discussion of the Navy's Historical
Radiological Assessment (Volume II Draft, March 2002) is needed. The
community should be provided with information and practical advice
in layman's language. There should be continuing efforts to
strengthen community understanding of the goals, principles, and
limitations of risk assessment. Expert testimony must be so
presented that it empowers residents to become informed decision
makers; media inaccuracies must be promptly rebutted. The National
Institutes of Health's "Consensus Development Program" is suggested
as a model to guide these efforts.
Required Responses -
-
Department of the Environment - 60 days
-
Department of Public Health - 60 days
-
Mayor's Office of Economic Development - 60
days
-
San Francisco Redevelopment Agency - 60
days
Finding
4
The complexities of the clean up, transfer, and reuse
of the closed HPS offer a wide range of opportunities to the City of
San Francisco and its citizens. The residents of the City, including
the environmentally and economically impacted BVHP, have the right
to maximum health and environmental protection as a result of the
return of HPS to civilian use. HPS, in a prime urban location along
the San Francisco Bay, must never again experience the environmental
degradation of past uses
Recommendation 4
DEnv, MOED, and SFRA should require that new
businesses in HPS comply with all environmental regulations, and the
City should strictly enforce compliance (including imposing monetary
penalties). The City and the community must be assured that the
legacy of toxic contamination at HPS is not repeated. All proposed
reuses, both residential and industrial, must be required by the
City to commit to environmental compliance and pollution prevention;
this commitment must be required of all developers and their
contractors. A public process for evaluating industrial facilities
wishing to locate at HPS should be established in order to provide
answers to questions related to a company's environmental record and
potential economic and environmental impact on BVHP.
Required Response -
-
Department of the Environment - 60 days
-
Mayor's Office of Economic Development - 60
days
-
San Francisco Redevelopment Agency - 60
day
Summary of Required Responses -
-
Mayor's Office of Economic Development -
Recommendations 1, 2a, 2b, 3, and 4
-
Board of Supervisors - Recommendation 1
-
Department of the Environment - Recommendations 3
and 4
-
Department of Public Health - Recommendation
3
-
Redevelopment Agency - Recommendations 1, 2a, 3,
and 4
ATTACHMENT 1
- References and Resources (listed by date)
-
HPS Area Plan of the General Plan of the City and
County of San Francisco, Draft, April 8, 1997
-
Hunters Point Shipyard Redevelopment Plan, July
14, 1997 (SF Redevelopment Agency)
-
Lennar/BVHP Preliminary Design Concept Plan,
2000
-
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Navy and
City, dated November 3, 2000
-
Proposition P, passed by the voters in November
2000, and associated Resolution 634-01, adopted by the City in
July 2001
-
ATSDR Health Consultation Summary, HPS Parcel E
Landfill Fire, January 2001
-
BVHP Community Revitalization Concept Plan,
Highlights, March 2001
-
Final Community Notification Plan, Bayview Hunters
Point, August 17, 2001(Department of the Navy)
-
SF Redevelopment Agency - Workshop informational
materials, October 23, 2001 First Amendment to the MOA dated
January 23, 2002
Web sites:
http://www.efdsw.navfac.navy.mil/Environmental/HuntersPoint.htm http://www.efdsw.navfac.navy.mil/Environmental/RAB.htm http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/sfund/overview.nsf http://www.sfgov.org/sfra/hpshipyard http://www.bvhp-pac.org/ http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HAC/PHA/treasure/tre_toc.html http://sfgov.org/sfenvironment/ http://www.dph.sf.ca.us/ http://consensus.nih.gov/about/about.htm
ATTACHMENT
2 - Map
of Site
Return to Civil Grand Jury Home
Page
|