ARC Ecology Comments on East Housing FOST



Brownfields: Marsh Crust: ARC Ecology's Comments on East Housing FOST

Brownfields

Brownfields Info
Alameda Tour Guide
Marsh Crust
Catellus EIR Comments

Toxicspot.com

Home Page
Brownfields
Military
Cleanup

Comments on the the "Draft Finding of Suitability to Transfer, East Housing Area, Alameda Point, California, December 30, 1999"

The following comments were prepared by ARC Ecology, a San Francisco based non-profit that provides technical assistance to community's during base closure.

The Draft FOST states in Section 5.0 that, "the presence of the Marsh Crust requires permanent institutional controls," and that the City of Alameda has developed an ordinance which, "satisfies the need for institutional controls on the Marsh Crust." In Section 7, the only restrictions placed upon the property relate to groundwater. Thus, the FOST presumes that the City ordinance satisfies the Navy's responsibility to establish institutional controls (ICs) for soil contamination at these parcels.
However, this is not in conformance with DoD's FOST guidance. The DoD's Guidance on the Environmental Review Process to Reach a Finding of Suitability to Transfer, states that transfer deeds should include, "Prohibiting activities that could disrupt any remediation activities or jeopardize the protectiveness of those remediation activities..." Based upon this guidance, the FOST should include restrictions for soil excavations in the East Housing area.

In addition, DoD's Guide to Establishing Institutional Controls at Closing Military Installations recommends that public notice mechanisms be developed in order to maintain effective ICs. Regarding excavation controls at the East Housing area, the Navy should also include a program of ongoing public notice. This program should be funded by the Navy and should be delegated to the City. It should include the establishment and maintenance of warning signs, as well as, a yearly notice letter to property owners and renters.
The FOST does not refer to the "Covenant to Restrict the Use of Property" between the City of Alameda and the California DTSC. This covenant should be discussed in the FOST given that it is an important component of the program of ICs being developed for the Marsh Crust contamination.
Section 5.1 of the FOST states that the City ordinance on excavations in the Marsh Crust area has established a threshold excavation depth such that, "any work below the threshold depth requires a permit." However, the FOST does not provide a copy of either the text of the city ordinance or its associated threshold depth map, so it is not possible for commentators to verify whether the FOST is describing an effective institutional control for the Marsh Crust contamination. We also point out that, on January 18, 2000, the Alameda City Council passed a version of the ordinance which similarly did not include a threshold depth map. The effectiveness of this proposed institutional control, and the acceptability of the FOST, both hinge upon the accuracy of the threshold depth map in delineating the depth to Marsh Crust contamination. Therefore, we do not consider this document to be an official draft FOST for public comment. We recommend that the Navy resubmit a revised version of the Draft FOST for public comment once it has assembled the complete package of information necessary to produce a defensible document.
Section 5.1, Marsh Crust Issue. If Marsh Crust contamination underlies the East Housing area, then effective ICs should be implemented for soils in the area. On the other hand, if the portion of the Marsh Crust underlying East Housing turned out not to be contaminated, then placing ICs on the property would be an unnecessary burden and cost to the City and other future property owners. Arc Ecology is concerned that there has been no sampling of PAHs in the deep soils at the East Housing area. In fact, most of the soil data at East Housing is for shallow soils (i.e., samples taken between 1 and 2 feet below ground surface, bgs). Even though the Navy has not demonstrated that subsurface soils are contaminated at East Housing, the FOST nonetheless states that ICs are required. Prior to finalizing a FOST which may add unnecessary financial and other burdens upon the community, we recommend that the Navy carry out a deep-soil sampling program to determine whether these soils are, in fact, contaminated.
The FOST contains no discussion of who is going to pay the costs of the proposed ICs. The language of the FOST implies that much of this cost is to be spun-off to the City, the State of California, and the local community. We believe that the Navy remains responsible for the bearing the costs of implementing ICs at its sites, whenever it proposes them as a preferred remedy.