current condition. that will be part of the entire development. as stated in our comment letter on which you all received a copy, we believe that the navy has quickly studied and understands the nature and extent of contamination and the range of alternatives are feasible and follow accepted scientific practice. we support the process by the navy and encourage the navy to give substantial consideration to the input that they receive from the public and from all stakeholders. thank you.

>> once a site gets on the list, the national priority list epa is obligated to insure the investigation and clean up actions and long-term monitoring of human health and the environment. we monitor protectiveness of the clean up actions every step of the way. in accordance to the super fund law, the navy is the lead agency and e.p.a. is the lead regulatory agency to make sure that the navy is following the law and making sure that every action that the navy takes is protective of human health and

the environment. in addition to myself, e.p.a. has many people staffed to monitor the navy's actions, we have human health risk assessors to make sure that the clean up levels, those types of in-points the navy is seeking to is protective of the local residents. we have an expert in reed logical clean up, a community involvement coordinator to make sure the navy reaches out and engages, an attorney to make sure of all of the legal issues are monitored and an engineering contractor with more than 15 years of experience at the shipyard. with respect to parcel e-2, epa is overseeing the navy's 15-year study of this parcel. all parts of the shipyard we regulators stay deeply involved in the testing and the design

and the construction step. a lot of people do not understand that all of the points laura talked about where soils were tested and groundwater were tested, that is done via a work plan sent to epa and the state first. we review it. we approve it. and then the navy implements it only after epa approves that. because of the extensive testing program we believe the navy has quickly identified the type, location and the depth of contamination in parcel e-. based on all of the data about the contamination the navy evaluated a number of alternatives and epa supports the preferred remedy for the same reasons that laura described. it is protective of the local community and the ecology of

san francisco bay, uses the best technologies and is consistent with the future land use. so, now we are interested. we are in the public comment period. we are interested in what the public suggestions are about how to clean up parcel e-2. final decision hasn't been made on how to clean up parcel e-2. that decision will be made jointly between epa and the state and the navy only after careful consideration of all of the departments. in case there is a disagreement, epa does have ultimate authority to make the final decision on the remedy. so, epa and the state will continue to regulate the navy's actions. once a final remedy is decided on it is really important that the navy send us design, work plans on how to carry out the hot spot removals, if the

landfill is going to be capped, how to design that capping remedy. and in other words we will stay involved through the design and through the remedy construction process. and even after the navy transfers interest in the property epa stays involved at the shipyard and we will continue to montar all of the actions at the shipyard to insure the local community is protected. thank you for your time. >> thank you. ryan. >> good afternoon supervisors. i am a senior hazard assistance scientist for dtsc. the california department of toxic substances control has been involved with the hunters point shipyard since 1991 and the state of california's lead environmental oversight agency

responsible for coordinating with other state agencies and insure that all characterization activities are conducted in accordance with california's applicable and relevant regulations. so, for parcel e-2, other state agency involved included the regional water quality control board, the california department of fish and game, the california department of resources, recycling and recovery and the california department of public health. so, we have reviewed the navy's plan and determined that the remedies that are currently proposed for this parcel would be protective of public health and the environment. thank you very much.

>> good afternoon supervisors. i am an engineer and geeolgist with the california regional water quality control board, aka, the water board. within the hunters point super fund program the regulatory role includes the protection of human health and the environment with a focus on water quality, such as the protection of san francisco bay, groundwater and state wetlands. the water board also serves as the lead agency for the clean up of petroleum pollution. we reviewed the proposed plan and considered the navy's preferred remedy in concept is quickly protective of human health and the environment. the elements of the plan for the landfill are consistent with the management of closed military and municipal

landfills in the region. our agency, along with the other regulatory agencies will continue to review and provide input during design, implementation and long-term management to insure that the final adopted plan results in a protective solution. thank you. >> i don't think we have any further reports from the agencies. we will now open it up for public comment. >> i am glad to hear that they support the remedies that the navy has put together. we, the community do not

support what they plan to do. and i don't want you all to forget in the year 2000, the voters of san francisco voted 87% of the voters voted that none of that land would be transferred to the city until it was cleaned to residential standards. you heard from the navy already, you won't be able to dig in the dirt. if you want to plant flowers or anything of that nature. now, i requested several times since 2001. here we are in 2011. when congress was spending $10 billion per month to fight a war in another country, i requested the city and the navy to come together along with the

community to request that they would set aside, congress would set a side a one-time, $10 billion to clean up that shipyard. nothing was done. all i hear is they want to cap. we do not want that area capped. we want it clean. we want the people that go out there to the shipyard to work to have all of the proper clothing because they have not been safe for the people going out there on that base. that is a super fund site. i hope i can say it right quick. those officials that came before you and lied to you about that shipyard, guess what happened? they have left the city. i am talking about michael coin and i am talking about the head of the health department that was representing the health department. now you have blackwells that left and gone back to oakland. they came before you and lied.

you have not listened to those of us from the community. thank you. >> today when i first entered city hall, i went to the clerk of the board and inspected the package regarding this hearing. nothing. just a one-page thing with no material in it. right from the beginning of this hearing there has been a way to deceive the public. having said that, you heard the navy's presentation, but let me point out a few things. depleted uranium. radiated animals were brought and buried all over hunters point. radials, i worked for the army.

if you read the final assessment report there are over 140 radiological elements in this area. stop lying to us. in the year 2000 there was a fire that lasted for two months. just a little methane gas the woman was talking about. the barrier broke in the year 2004 entering the jurisdiction where you -- ucsf has their labs on the shipyard. now you hear that the land can be transferred, the state park can be used for development, this land can be used for a park and then homes can be built. when the homes are built you will not be able to enter your backyard and dig the dirt. you will be able to go by the shore line but you will not be able to swim. finally the bay, it is

contaminated with radiological elements. i rest my case. >> i am glad we were at least able to hold this hearing. but this has been a fight going on for a long time. and it seems that san francisco is not worth the help of the people here in this city is not worth a little over $300 million. and actually they have already spent enough money to remove

it. and as a matter of fact the epa asked them to deal with parcel e first and they refused to. they never intended to remove it. now they removed in canada a site up there, removed it and things worked out fine. and it can be removed. if it don't cost $300 million i think it will cost more than that. but the navy is refusing to spend the money that it takes to clean up that. the people supposed to be able to say to the degree they want that shipyard cleaned up, it

wasn't just the surrounding community. it was the whole city. we need to hold them to that and look, this is san francisco. that land out there was pristine land they screwed up and they should have to pay for it. not just because the area out there is 92% people of color. i don't want nobody living out there. it is just a fraud that they are trying to perpetrate out there that they are going to build all of these houses and people going to be suing. it will cost more to try to protect the people that are going to sue about what is happening out there. i hope people really seep -- see. right now the people living around there is 25% high death

rates than the rest of the city. and that is happening now. do we want it to keep happening? or do we want to fix it once and for all. 100 years from now, we will still have people living on top of this? it does not make sense. i feel we should clean it up and get it out of there and it can be done. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon supervisors. two minutes is not enough for this issue. what i am here -- hopefully what we leave with is when the

initial resolution, why we are here today is because in the initial resolution it was stated that whatever the navy planned to do for their rod that they would have to have a hearing. we would have been rough shotted over or we would not be here. my plea is that you would remain effective and continue that resolution along the lines of having option number two. actually insisting about you are about the only body in the city who we have any hope in of not being completely corrupted as our agencies, which we have proven. i am sure they are deleting emails much faster these days

than they were in the past. agen from the navy, she just said that this is fine and methane gas is ok. you will not catch on fire. methane gas, at certain levels, changes the oxygen, and can cause asphyxiation. you cannot see this or smell this, but this is only one discrepancy in with the navy is telling you. we know that the navy that we can trust in can continue with the only community points

involved with the navy. that is how much that we know that we can trust them. i am so happy that you mentioned this. i was writing this down because they are showing this is 6 feet under. it does not take a rocket scientist to know about this. you know that this is constantly moving up. this is ridiculous. and i went a little bit over. thank you. i have not been here for a long time. i just want that 30 seconds to say, continued that resolution that would put the number to alternative at harm, and insist that this is what the navy does, as well as -- thank you.

>> next up is harrison. and then, mrs. donohue. >> i am here with our people organized for employment rights. we have been involved with this issue for a long time. i think this is minimizing when the navy talks about the paint that glows in the dark. it would not cost $350 million if this is all that we have. the importance of what is before you today is that this is a remedial. the second was to completely remove this.

what we say is that remedial action #2 most complete complies with the proposition and will of the city and the neighborhood, and the resolution when you passed the environmental impact report. you have approved the future use of this plan, and this board was in no way suggesting support for a cap because of the contamination. the navy did not even consider the second remedial action. this only cost $87 million and we will not even consider the second option. $350 million is not unmanageable, people said they did not want this done only if

this was an expensive. the navy is responsible for clearing this up. and also, will look at the lists of things to consider, we have to consider the long-term health interests of the community. this has cost insurance but this is the most important. the community is not engaged in this process. thank you. >> this is maria harrison? >> i am here for health and environmental justice, representing the many members of bayview-hunters point.

this body indicated that capt. would not be the alternative. but you are here with this notion -- and i really hate to do this by would like to draw your attention to the other areas, midway village in particular, and for every eight -- eight years, they have had to do this over and over. and they have the plastic and all of those wonderful things that we are hearing about. this is midway village of los geneva. this is very close but one thing i would really like for you to consider, in the pass years we have come before you and we have said that people first -- we are the constituents that you were put here to

represent. when we say 87% of the voices in san francisco are against this, cleanest to the fullest extent with residential standards, and you allow them to remove a segment of cleaning and they refused to review this because of the money. money versus life is what you are being asked to consider. if you allow for this to move forward without revisiting your own statements made by your predecessors and review the documents that have been provided to you by the groups that i work with, i think this would be criminal. i do not think that any of you are criminals. i can tell that you are doing your homework. i understand that you have been

doing your homework. i do not know you well but i hope to learn how well you think about people and want to impress upon you that people first, not dollars, just because we live in a poor community, and many of us to not speak the king's english, do not belittle us by saying, these organizations are correct. not the epa or the navy, or the water board has had one real testing. they read you what the navy has given them. this is not satisfactory to the community and it should not be satisfactory to you. i realize if i keep on eye will preach to a sermon.

>> next, we have mrs. donohue. >> good afternoon. i live a half blocks from the shipyard, and i have been before the board of supervisors many times. but i would just urge for you to please, we need a complete cleaning of the shipyard. i know people that have died, three children have died here. my daughter -- daughter-in-law died in 2005, 28 years old and i was right there when they

brought the navy and -- into our community. when they let them in the community over all of us, and our children. we were having headaches. they do not know what is going on. i was having headaches. i would stand before you and like the one time -- the health department can sit here but they have not spent one night there, and they have not been knocking on one door, to assess the people. how can they say that we are okay? thank you.

>> i live in the bay view area. i was living there when i could see the ships coming in, leaving the debris in the bay, which they never cleaned up. those who are here listening to us, this is a dangerous area. i watched that fire for two months up there. it would still be burning because there was gas underneath this. in this article, on page 7, the

gases out there. the health department says that this is so dangerous. those people are not telling the truth. the health department -- i have never had problems like this until they started missing with the shipyard out there. the navy has spent more time saying they cannot claim this. they should stop procrastinating, get out there, clean that area. this does not work. i heard them talking about the plastics. but plastic bricks. they're having a bad problem right now with plastics. they put this in and what they put this in and what happens?