‘Ticking time bomb’: Suit claims ‘egregious’ failures in SF shipyard cleanup

An environmental advocacy group is suing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Navy for “egregious violations” during its cleanup of radioactive toxins at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard.

San Francisco-based Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice and the UC Berkeley Law Clinic filed the lawsuit Friday, calling for, among other demands, 100% of the land to be retested for radioactive contaminants. They claim the Navy was obligated to do so, but never did.

Greenaction in December filed a notice of intent to both federal agencies, outlining their concerns and threatening litigation. Bradley Angel, executive director of Greenaction, said they had video calls with Navy and EPA representatives in the ensuing days, but those meetings did not result in anything meaningful.

“We got nowhere,” Angel told The Examiner. “While acknowledging the issue, they are not taking the next step. In our view, you're stonewalling.”

He said the Navy and EPA “left us no choice” but to file the complaint due to a lack of action.

When reached for comment, spokespeople for both the EPA and Navy told The Examiner they cannot comment on pending litigation.

Both agencies have 60 days to respond to the complaint.

Greenaction alleges that the Navy, which is responsible for investigating and conducting the cleanup, and the EPA, which oversees the Navy’s efforts, have each “acted in a manner that is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not otherwise in accordance with law,” the complaint stated.

In addition to a full retesting of the site, the lawsuit also asks the EPA to bolster its oversight on the Navy, and for a federal court order mandating the agencies comply with environmental cleanup law.

The 900-acre parcel of land on the southeastern tip of San Francisco was used as a naval shipyard from 1939 to 1974, during which it was also home to a radiological defense laboratory. The Navy’s activities contaminated the shipyard soil and groundwater and surface water and sediments in the adjacent San Francisco Bay with toxins like petroleum fuels, pesticides, heavy metals, polychlorinated biphenyls, volatile organic compounds, and radionuclides.

Navy officials as recently as December found a radioactive chip smaller than a dime during routine soil testing at the site. The discovery came months after the Navy uncovered a radioactive deck marker, the size of a silver dollar, which helped light the way for ships at night.

The site is near thousands of Bayview residents, many of whom belong to The City’s most disadvantaged communities.

“This would never be tolerated in a rich white community. This is a picture-perfect postcard of environmental racism,” Angel said.

The City also plans to build roughly 10,000 homes on part of the site as part of a project to develop two waterfront neighborhoods which will provide housing, retail, business offices and commerce to the area.

The EPA declared the land a Superfund site in 1989, which allows them to clean up toxic waste emitted by processing plants, landfills and mining sites. The Hunter’s Point shipyard is the only such location in San Francisco.

Environmental and community advocates for years have criticized the Navy and EPA’s clean-up efforts . They say they fear the situation will only get worse, as rising sea levels push contaminated groundwater closer to the surface of the land.

The suit also claims that Tetra Tech EC, the company the Navy contracted with to remediate the radiation contamination at the site, falsified soil sample test reports. Two former Tetra Tech supervisors pleaded guilty to fraud charges. But the company maintains its innocence and claims the two former employees acted on their own.

When asked to characterize the Navy and EPA’s cleanup efforts, Angel said “it’s pitiful, inadequate, and a threat to public health, and literally and figuratively a cover up.”

“We know it's a serious situation. We know that deadly toxic and deadly radioactive waste are across the shipyard Superfund site,” he continued. “They need to come up with a plan to remove contamination — to the extent humanly possible, that they currently plan on putting a cap on — which is a ticking time bomb.”