El
Toro is one of the most contaminted toxic sites in the US.
Irvine City's own toxic contamination report shows the Great Park will cost an additional $350 million to clean up El Toro for a Park (at least).
The Defense budget for cleaning up ALL sites in the US is $139 million.
Do YOU want Them to
funnel more DEFENSE money to El Toro and not the current War on
America?
Jan.
20- EL TORO REUSE, Irvine
downplays health hazard on park property, OC
Register
GREGORY
F. HURLEY Mr. Hurley, an environmental lawyer
and California Environmental Assessor, has served
on the Restoration Advisory Board overseeing the
clean-up of the base for seven years. He lives in
Laguna Beach.
I have been shocked by the city of Irvine’s recent “about face” on the issue of contamination at MCAS El Toro.
The city’s new Great Park Plan proposes extensive excavations for gardens, sports fields, a great lake and other uses that will involve direct human contact with the soil on base. Irvine’s own studies indicate that the base is not safe for development as the Great Park, and that the community (not just the Navy) will face substantial risks and costs as a result. The city, and Mayor Agran, are now disregarding these health risks and disavowing prior statements that the Navy’s clean-up after transfer of the base would be insufficient.
The city of Irvine spent more than $200,000 to conduct a study titled, “The Navy’s Underestimation of Solvent Contamination at MCAS El Toro.” The city of Irvine’s solvents study concludes:
• “700,000
pounds of solvents” lie undiscovered in the soil as a
result of leaks in the sanitary sewer system (Section 5.2).
• “Impacted soil will almost surely be encountered during excavation” (Section 8.2) and that the cost of cleaning the soil will be an additional “$35 million to $350 million” (Section 8.1).
• Because the allowable exposure concentrations of these contaminates are well below the level that can be detected by either smell or field monitoring, it is likely that the community could be exposed to harmful levels of hazardous materials without even knowing it (Section 8.3).
• Close and continued exposure to soil, which is excavated on base, represents a “higher than acceptable cancer risk” (Section 8.3).
• “During their initial work at the site, they [construction workers] will be exposed to contamination via inhalation of soil vapors, incidental ingestion of soil, and direct absorption through the skin. Accordingly if construction proceeds without remediating the widespread solvent contamination, hundreds or thousands of construction workers will be exposed to significant levels of a carcinogen” (Section 8.3).
The Great Park would tear up much of the paving on base that limits human contact with this contaminated soil. The proposed park would excavate and disturb more than 1,500 acres of soil, including digging a 100-acre lake for “water recreation.” The park has gardens, playing fields and a petting zoo where there would be direct and continuous human contact with this soil. However, Irvine’s study states that the risk to those in close proximity to this soil “is 10 times higher than acceptable levels of cancer risk” (Section 8.3).
Irvine’s current response to these risks
has been to suggest that the Navy will take care of all remediation. Irvine knows better and has said so. Irvine’s study was released more than 23 months ago, yet the Navy has not undertaken the study’s recommendations. Until Irvine proposed the Great Park, Irvine was expressing doubts about the Navy’s commitment to clean up the base. On April 14, 2000, Irvine asked me to sign, as the chairman of the Restoration Advisory Board, a letter on Irvine’s behalf stating that the Navy’s post-transfer activities “are considered by the community stakeholders to be insufficient to assure the community that the cleanup is being accomplished in a complete and thorough manner.” In other words, as recently as April of 2000, Irvine was asking me to tell the Navy that its clean-up after transfer would not be sufficient.
The contamination on base is real, as are the health risks. Larry Agran and the city of Irvine have an obligation to disclose the risks from their Great Park Plan, and the limitations in the Navy’s obligation to clean up this base after transfer.
Copyright(c) 2002 AWG PAC and No on Measure W. All rights reserved.