>> the meeting will come to order. this is january 4th, 2019, special meeting of the san francisco local agency formation commissioner. i am sandra lee fewer, chair of the commission. i am joined by commissioner shan'ti singh and i would like to thank the staff at sfgovtv and michael and jason for recording today's meetings. madam clerk, do you have an announcement. >> clerk: yes, silence all cellphones and electronic

devices. complete your cards if documents are submitted to the clerk. >> thank you, very much. could i please have a motion to excuse commissioner pollock from the meeting today? >> thank you. seconded by commissioner ronen. and madam clerk, can you call item number 2. >> clerk: item number 2 is consideration and approval of a contract with richards watson for lafco legal services. >> i believe we have a presentation from our executive officer mr. bryan goebel. >> good morning, happy new year. thank you for being here today. i'm here today to ask your approval of a contract for lafco legal services. the commission, as you know, authorized me back in june to issue an r.f.p. for legal services. seeing how the contract had not been updated in more than 20 years since lafco was formed. the r.f.p. was issued on

august 17th. we extended the deadline to october 26th. i did a considerable amount of outreach and we received four very strong proposals from some of the leading law firms representing lafco's and other public agencies in california. and remy public law group. all four of those firms qualified to proceed to the interview process and then i selected an r.f.p. panel to evaluate the proposals. on the panel were angela calvillo, clerk of the board, beth rubensteen and rachel jones, the executive officer of lafco. the firm that scored the highest was richards, watson and gershan. they left it would be best for lafco.

particularly, they have specialized knowledge of some of the issues this lafco is working on. they were instrumental in getting marin clean energy off the ground. they have a lot of experience with c.c.a.s. they have experience and municipal finance, open meeting law, ceqa and land use planning as well. today, i'm asking you to approve a resolution and contract with richards, watson and gershan for a term of four years with general council and ms. callsa is in the audience today along with her partner greg stepanovich. this is my first r.f.p. so it was a learning experience. i would like to thank john gibner for his assistance and serving as legal council for this. wilson ink and the clerk of the boards office, i called him many

times and i would like to thank our evaluation panel. also, i'd like to thank teresa stricker and remy public law to their service to lass co. i'm excited to work with ms. culsa and her firm and i'm happy to ask any questions. >> do we have any questions or comments? >> please. >> i just want to thank you. it looks like you ran a very great process for your first r.f.p. so thank you for all that work. just to welcome you to lafco and thank the firthank the firm. the fact your firm has so much experience and the meaty subject areas that this body is very excited to take on is a real asset. i feel like we're going to start a newer a of lafco in 2019, and do some incredible work.

>> thank you. >> i think we echo that sentiment also. thank you, commissioner ronen. so, seeing no other questions, let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public that wish to comment on item number 2. public comment is closed. is there a motion to approve the legal services contract with rich -- >> clerk: there are amendments made to the resolution. most are conforming and clarifying changes but the most noted change is the addition the contract will commence upon approval by the commission. >> ok. that's great. is there any comment around these amendments? can we have a motion to set these amendments. great. and seconded by commissioner. great, you can take that without objection. thank you, very much, madam clerk. let's open up for public comment. seeing none. public comment is now closed.

is there a motion to approval the legal services contract as amended? >> so moved. >> great. i think we can take that. great. seconded by commissioner ronen this contract is approved without objection. madam collect, call item number 3. >> clerk: item number 3 is public comment. >> are there any members of the public who would like to speak on matters within our jurisdiction but not on today's agenda? seeing none, public comment is now closed. madam clerk, can you please call item number 4. >> clerk: future agenda item. >> colleagues, any future agenda ideas you would like to put on? >> not at the moment, no. >> seeing none, let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public who would like to comment on item number 4? seeing none. public comment is now closed. madam clerk, is there any other business before us today? >> clerk: that concludes our

business. >> we are adjourned. thank you very much. welcome. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> shop and dine in the 49 promotes local biz and challenges the san franciscans to do their shop and dine in the 49 within the by supporting the services we help san francisco remain unique and successful and vibrant so where will you shop and dine in the 49 san francisco owes itch of the charm to the many neighborhoods

people coma greet and meet it has an personality these neighborhoods are economic engine seeing the changes is a big deal to me especially being a san francisco native and it is important to support the local businesses but also a lot to over here it is nice not to have to go downtown i think that is very important 0 for us to circulate our dollars the community before we bring them outside of the community for the time we have one dollars in the community is the better off we are it is about economic empowerment by apron ingress the businesses that are here. >> shopping local cuts down the

cyber foot you'll find cookies and being transported the world where everything is manufactured and put on the assembly line having something local is meaning more the more we support our local businesses the more i can walk down to where i need to be. >> bridges contingency bye like west portal it is about city and san francisco may have a big name but a small city and a lot of small communities shop and dine in the 49 highlighted that and reminded people come outburst and i love that about

this city i'll always be a >> can you please rise for the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. vice president mazzucco, i would like to call roll. >> please do. >> vice president mazzucco. >> present. >> commissioner dejesus is en route. commissioner hurst. >> a commissioner breckner. >> a commissioner mazzucco, you have a quorum. also with us is william scott, the chief of police and the deputy director of the department of police

accountability sarah hawkens, chief of staff, sorry. >> thank you very much, and welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the wednesday, december 12, 2018 san francisco police commission meeting. this will be our last meeting of the month as we head into the holiday season, so without further ado, call line item number one, consent agenda. >> receive and file action. request for approval to accept $6,000 donation from the san francisco police officers association for the sfpd wilderness program index fund. >> u a commissioners, you have in your packet a memorandum regarding the police officers association donation, and we actually had one last week for the police wilderness program which is a great program that takes kids from the city to hiking trips. it was started by officer walter scott, the former son of the former chief of police. he started on his own with money and took kids out. it's a good program. is there any objections,

concerns, or questions. hearing none, do i have a motion? >> second. >> any public comment regarding the police wilderness fund? hearing none, public comment is closed. all in favor? please call the next line item. >> two, 2a, chief's report. weekly crime friends, provide an overview of offenses occurring in san francisco, significant incidents, chief's report will be limited to a brief description of the significant incidents. commission discussion will be limited to determining whether to calendar any of the incidents the chief describes for a future commission meeting. major events, provide a summary of planned activities and events occurring since the previous meeting including santa con. this will include a brief overview of any unplanned events or activities occurring in san francisco having an impact on public safety. commission discussion on unplanned events and activities the sheaf describes will be limited to determining whether to calendar for a future meeting. community engagement division

highlights, provide an overview of recent activities coordinated by the community engagement division. and status update regarding environmental testing and building 606 low t kayed at old hunters point shipyard. >> thank you very much. good evening, chief. >> good evening, vice president mazzucco, commissioners, director henderson. i will start off the police report with overall crime trends. and in continuation from the last meeting last week, i am happy to report that overall crimes are down 8.72%. that is 4,940 incidents below this time last year. total violent crimes down 2.08% which is down 127 incidents. and that's broken down, homicides are down 23%, with 13 incidents below this time last year. and gun violence is down 30% which is 57 incidents below this time last year. total property crime were down

8.89% which is 4,813 incidents below last year. led by auto burglaries down by 18.22% which is 5,376 incidents less than this time last year. of our homicides, we've had -- of the 43 this year, we have had 29 of the 43 were cleared, and 25 of those were cleared by arrest. and we had four exceptional clearance. and the suicide figures at this point of the year with two weeks to go, we're tracking pretty good. it's the best we have beens in the past six years. so we're very hopeful that we can finish the year strong and work with the communities and start next year strong as well. that is a really good trend going into 2019. and in terms of our shooting

victims of the nonfatal incidents, fatal, is 30% below this time last year. 22 of our 43 homicides were fatal. and that represents a 41% reduction in firearm-related homicides from this time last year. and i am going to talk a little bit and when i get to special events about the gun buyback that we are partnering with, united play is this weekend, but one of the things that we believe that the organization is that working with many community partners including partners like united players and some of the many of the community organizations that we work with, it's a partnership. and we believe that that is helping us both address the violence and also solve the cases when we do have violence. so that is a good thing to report, and we will continue that momentum going into next

year. a couple of significant cases that i would like to update you on over the past week including a shooting that happened yesterday in bayview at oakdale and baldwin, where two people were shot including a six-year-old child who was shot. they both are nonlife threatening injuries. but we're going to need the public's help on that. we don't have anyone in custody, and we're definitely asking if anyone out there has any information regarding this shooting to call 575-4444. that is our tip line. we also had a hit and run early this morning overnight that involved a pedestrian that was struck at bush and leavenworth.

unfortunately, this person that was hit passed away later in the morning at s.f. again. a 58-year-old female who was a san francisco resident. it was a hit and run. we don't have a suspect identified yet, and again, we're asking that if the public has any information regarding this this particular incident, call 575-4444. over the past week, santa con was one of the events that we had to deploy for over the weekend. and there were 10,000 people and participants in santa con events and there were no official sponsor and a lot of people come to the city and enjoy the city and have a good time. and we have heavy deployment

over the weekend for that event as well as a couple of other events over the weekend. in total, we don't have any significant problems. there were seven arrests for 6:47 and mostly being intoxicated in public. there is a pretty highly publicized incident that happened at a restaurant in polk street that was vandalized, but the two young ladies surrendered at northern station. and felony vandalism and battery. those were the significant events this weekend. and we talked about the gun buyback coming up, and so now i'll give a highlight of the community engagement division events and over the past month and sfpd command staff and

participated in the veteran's day parade. the san francisco auxiliary response team or alert hosted the fourth one at the police academy and prepares volunteers to participate and assist law enforcement in the case of a major catastrophic event that are volunteers and have gone through training to work with us in the event of a catastrophic emergency, and we can always use more volunteers. if anyone is interested in joining or being trained to be an alert volunteer, please contact us. we had a disaster preparedness fair. actually, that was in september. but this was designed to prepare us for catastrophic events and security companies around the city and other companies around

the city and participated with the commander and participate as well as some of the other officers. in the past months of 11 of food drives and meal give aways and that will continue into the holiday season. there is quite a few of those to report in december when i get to january report. but as always, the officers are out there engaged in the community and giving back to the community. and there is no better time to do it than the holiday season, so you will see us out and about participating in many events in the next two weeks. and the last thing is the highlight that we are participating in the toy drive in conjunction with walgreens. and we kicked it off on november 16 and bins are at walgreens stores and san francisco police department locations and police

station. if anyone has toys to donate, it is a very worthy cause and last year we collected over 9,000 gifts that we gave back to the community in cooperation with walgreens. that is very worthy event. and we encourage the public to participate. and last thing, november 17, we participated in our seventh annual bike for vets event. over 100 bikes which these are refurbished pikes in conjunction with many community organizations and we have an event at the atwater tavern where veterans come and with the brief safety lesson and is a very, very good event. and the two years that i have been here and is gratifying to give back to the veterans that have served our country. that concludes this portion of our report. >> any questions for the chief

regarding the statistics? only arrested six people for public intoxication? >> seven. >> saw about 600. but that is okay. anything further for the chief? okay. please call the next line item. >> i think there's one more under the chief's report. the status on 606. >> status on 606 and we have deputy chief bob mozer that is going to present. >> good evening, chief. and for members of the public, the commission has been inquiring about the various news articles and concerns about the contamination at the hunter's point naval shipyard, specifically building 606 which houses the san francisco police department's crime lab and our evidence room, but at one point actually housed many of the specialty units from the tactical division t motorcycles, and so we have some concerns in light of the indictment and

incarceration of those who are responsible for doing the testing out there. i know there's extreme neighborhood concerns by the folks living out there. so we have been asking for reports and there's been testing and i read some articles saying we shouldn't be too concerned, but again, our role is commissioners of the well being of the officers and to serve as civilians. and i know you have a very skeptical commission here tonight about whether or not we should have anybody out there. and i know that efforts are being made to move our officers and civilian employees next year. that is already on course, but and we're prepared as a commission to do something sooner or later. i will turn this over to commissioner dejesus who is an expert in this the area in toxic torts and she will ask the hard questions, but feel free to give us your update. >> thank you.

commissioners, chief scott, director henderson, members of the public, i am deputy chief robert mozier of the sfpd administration bureau joined with commander robert o'sullivan of the administration bureau, captain alexa o'brien of the facilities division, mr. anthony tave, our facilities manager, and mr. mark mateus and mr. kevin millani from the department of public health occupational safety division. so i am here to provide you an update regarding the current condition at 606 and our current testing efforts. i would like to start off with a recap of our department's initial meeting with the employees of building 606 that occurred in july as this is going to frame my presentation tonight. so on friday, july 27, members of the police department along with members of the department of public health occupational

health division t safety team, excuse me, and the environmental health division met with members of and employees of building 606 to address concerns regarding a recently written newspaper article regarding the cleanup efforts at the hunters point naval shipyards. as a result of that meeting, we came away with several takeaways that the department committed to doing. and before i go into the items, i want to stress that the department of public health has assured us and continued to assure us that building 606 and the occupants are safe. and this comprehensive and health and safety assessments conducted at the bible and as of today and the report that i am going to give you t assessments have not produced any evidence of health hazards in building 606 and related to hunter's point naval shipyard cleanup. as concerns have been raised in the past and continue to be raised currently, and as we move

forward, those are addressed and documented through the assigned and industrial generalist. and the has been the driving force of everything that we have done from july on the initial meeting july 27 to today. so as a result of our january meeting where we committed to taking several steps to not only ensure that the members and employees of building 606 are safe but also that they feel safe. those commitments were the retesting of water for biological, heavy metal, petroleum-based contaminants, organic compound, and radiological contaminants. the retesting of air and settled dust in the building for contaminants including lead,

asbestos and radiological and the removal of dirt or soil, excuse me, from a previous that occurred in in section 606 and the check of the water filtration at building 606 to make sure that it was operating properly. a test of standing water that occasionally will collect during the heavy rains in the crawl space area underneath building 606. and that test of standing water would be for the same contaminants that we tested the drinking water for. and to provide test updates to the test results and test efforts, that the california department of public health was conducting in parcels a1 and a2 on the shipyards at the time. so with regards to air and dust,

the d.p.h. conducted tests of air samples at fixed locations within building 606 as well as on a body monitor on an employee. and conducted tests of settled dust within the building. no lead or asbestos present in the samples and water, the p.u.c. conducted several tests of water and conducted a test of water going on to the shipyards at the crisp road sight. they tested water coming into the building and testing of water samples at two locations within the building and kitchenette sink and a sink in the men's restroom. the sink in the men's restroom would you say at the terminus of the line, so the furtherest area of water supply, so if any water supply was going to be affected, that would be the most likely.

the analysis for those tests included pesticides, herbides, heavy metals, petroleum, petroleum, hydrocarbons, trimethylanes, and volatile organic compounds, semivolatile compounds, total organic carbon, chlorine residual, fecal coliform bacteria, general water quality and radionucleotides. and the negative for pesticides, radio nucleotides. and what the test did find was that there was a low level of chlorine in the water within the building, but it did not find elevated levels of coliform bacteria, so that was a good thing that the concern is if you don't have high levels of chlorine in the water, the concern would be bacteria

contamination which they did not find. they did find elevated lead in one of the sinks. that was the sink, the furtherest at the terminus line t one in the men's restroom. what they did find is that lead that they found in that faucet was contained to the building. the water coming into the building was clean. the actual lead was found within the building, and it's believed that that lead is caused by within the pipes. so the p.u.c. as a recommendation f that water was going to be consumed, to be deemed potable, to actual drinking water, not to wash your hand or wash a dish, but to flush the line for approximately 30 seconds to flush out any contaminants. we're going beyond that, even though people at 606 don't drink -- they are currently drinking bottled water. we are going beyond that and

looking at installing actual filters on those faucets to as an added layer of protection for the water that is coming out of there even though we're not drinking the water. d.h.p. will be conducting further and ongoing tests regarding the water quality and we will have having those occur on a regular cycle for those areas within the building. a test of the exterior filters determine they are working properly and the recommendation for that is just to make the schedule of the regular checks and regular maintenance and the soil from the rear of the building. when we had committed to eventually moving that soil out, we determined that we needed to test that soil before we remove

it to see what was in that soil. that soil has been analyzed for fecal coliform, heavy metals, volatile organic compounds, semivolatile organic compounds, t.p.h., p.c.b.s, pesticides and radio nucleid levels were below current release criteria set forth by the e.p.a., california department of public health, and the navy. the soil has also criteria has met landfill disposal criteria and has been accepted t profile has been accepted for disposal at standard landfill. further comprehensive tests are pending by a certified health physicist, and they will include gamma exposure rates in the crawl space as mentioned, the surrounding parking lots and the immediate envelope of the building, and other areas of the

building as deemed concerns or necessary by employees within the building. the certified health physicist is also going to be conducting tests from the hvac and floors and direct alpha and beta surface activity. we're looking at that testing to begin in mid january. future testing of the water and the crawl space, so department of public health went out after the heaviest rains that we have had all year, which were shortly after i believe the thanksgiving holiday, and the water -- there was no standing water at that time underneath the crawlspace. as we get heavier rains and that water collects, we're going to be collecting samples of that and doing similar tests to the reflect the tests that we did on the water in the building. parcel a, so we have been providing regular updates to the

members and employees of building 606. our most recent update to the employees at building 606 occurred this monday where we presented the results that i am presenting here tonight. the california department of public health has completed their scans of parcel a1 and then subsequently moved on to parcel a2, and if i can have the overhead projector here. so if you will see, parcel a1 is right here and parcel a2. that is where the department of public health had conducted their testing. and included toe to ray and

walkover scan. as they did their testing, which started, i believe, in the summer, they put out biweekly updates on their results. and what they found in all of their biweekly results which for parcel a1 and i believe there's 13, and for parcel a2 and i believe there's three. they did not find any anomalies besides elevated potassium levels which they determined that that was a naturally occurring substance and was not a threat to public health. and the one anomaly they did find which was publicized was the deck marker. and they did find a deck marker during their scan of parcel a1. and that marker was buried approximately 10 inches deep

understood beneath the soil. and with the soil that came from that pole and determined the hit they were getting was from the deck marker. the final report from the california department of public health is not out yet even though they have completed the testing and given these biweekly updates. that will be out in february. the navy will be conducting and starting in parcel g. that is right here. >> can you put an x where building 606 is? >> parcel g is right here and building 606 is right there. and is across the street from parcel g where the navy will begin testing next year sometime around march is what i have been told.

we are -- members of the department of public health and the police department are going to be participating in the tour of the naval point shipyards with the navy tomorrow to look at all the clean efforts and to be able to ask the navy any questions that we may have. that will be occurring tomorrow and certainly as we get more information and we will have additional meetings with employees at 606. and before i take final questions, i want to thank our partners from the department of public health whofsh there from the beginning of this process and helped through this entire testing process as we move forward. with that, i would like to open it up to questions. >> thank you, deputy chief. i know you are a police officer, not an environmental scientist, so we appreciate your hard work.

and i will turn it over to commissioner dejesus. >> look, i am not a scientist either, but i am going on just what i think the article and the e.p.a. blasts the navy for plan to retest soil at the san francisco shipyard and this is the august 17 article. we talked about that before. i guess the concern is that the navy basically says that -- excuse me, that e.p.a. says that the navy's plan to retest for radioactivity is inadequate and unscientific. it says the testing that the navy was propose willing not provide the necessary confidence level to establish one parcel g would be suitable for redevelopment. and i guess that the plan was too cursory and did not reflect recommendations by the e.p.a. and the california department of public health. i am glad they are working with

you and the question it leaves for me, are there any tests that the e.p.a. recommended be done in that particular area? are there any tests that were not done? and it says here the california department of public health had recommendations and the e.p.a. has recommendations for a better testing process. i am wondering if when they did the testing did they incorporate any of the e.p.a. recommendations on the testing? the other thing about the report is everyone saying it's great and fine, but but no one is telling us the type of testing they did, the type of equipment. there are different types of analysis fors as be asbestos and just tell you there is fibers in the air or not, and not necessarily if they are asbestos fibers. there are other ways of looking at actually identifying asbestos fibers. and i don't know what the protocol is. sometimes when you are doing this type of research, they put a threshold. if i don't see more than five fiber, i am going to say no

fibers detected doesn't mean there isn't any, but i don't have more than five. so therefore, my analysis is going to show none. i don't know the protocol that was used. i don't know if you know the protocol that was used. and according to all these articles and from asbestos i know every single exposure counts and contributes to the injury. you can't say which exposure can cause the disease. however, for the radioactivity, there is no safe exposure to radioactivity. the fact they found after they told us everything was great and i think in the fall they found that radioactive piece of material tells us that something is missing. i think the e.p.a. is saying that the way the navy surveys the plant surveys for retesting that may miss critical radioactivity issues and may have to take more samples and propose to make reliable conclusions about safety. i don't know from your report if they did that.

if they increased their amount of samples or the area where they did the sampling. i am notten an expert. so when it comes down to me is we have personnel there. and i think we're really taking a risk with their lives. i don't understand why we don't really put pressure on the mayor's office and expedite removing them. i can't remember. it was 42 employees that are there? and one of them -- some of them are there just for storage for everyday. and we had this discussion before. so the report is great, but i don't know what measures were used and where. and did they increase the amount of testing and include the e.p.a. recommendations? i am still in the dark. >> sure. so first of all, this test and all the tests that were done at 606 are independent of the navy. so they don't involve the navy. the reason why we did this was to have a fresh start for lack

of a better term to test from the beginning starting from july 27. this is what we committed to testing. and we were going to do the testing through the department of public health to make sure our people are safe and they feel safe. all the test results that i spoke about today which are hard copies in the bind rer posted on the commission's website. they are available for everybody to see. the actual testing parameters, i can't -- not the person to really speak to that. i would have to turn to my colleagues at the department of public health to speak a little bit more about kind of how the testing parameters came about. but as i had mentioned, especially with the soil, that those levels were below levels at current standards set by the e.p.a. and set by the california

department of public health. and set forth by the navy under current standards. could i ask you to come up, mark, and kevin, and maybe speak a little bit more -- >> that is great. i didn't see the report. i didn't -- did i see the report? did we get it? i can't remember seeing it. you didn't read the 600-page report? >> a little technical. so joining me is mr. kevin millani and mr. mark mateus from the department of public health. they have been assisting us in this process with the testing and mark, maybe -- kevin, maybe if you can explain about the testing of the air and what that entailed and what we testing for. >> sure. please use the microphone. >> hi.

>> can you enlighten us? >> of course. where would you like to start? >> i didn't go over this thing, but i am concerned with the e.p.a. says that california has certain areas or ways they want to test and the e.p.a. was making recommendations. i don't know what the e.p.a. was recommending and i don't know if we took that into consideration and did any of the stuff think were recommending, number one, and number two, how did you go about it and how did you come down to the analysis in terms of the dust that was found that was asbestos and the radioactivity? it is out of my league for that. >> to preface everything, there will be a full report compiled by the department of health which we are waiting on the radiological screening before we complete that. that will be in deep detail and all of the methods used. but to start with the asbestos, we used the t.e.m. method. it is a modified protocol used by the school district which is very stringent specific to

asbestos, so it can identify exactly specific asbestos fibers. and so whatever type of fibers they might find. all of those samples -- sorry if i am too close. all the samples and the static and the personal monitoring samples, all came back nondetect. we used field blanks as far as box blanks to make sure there was no contamination putting the cassettes on the pumps themselves. as far as the lead goes, again, that was also the occupational setting that we were sampling in and static and personal monitoring samples and all those were set against cal-osha mandated levels for occupational exposure, and again, all those were nondetect for lead. as far as the settled dust, the settled dust was a collection of actual bulk dust throughout the warehouse itself, aened those were analyzed by phase contra microscopy to identify the

particulates and no lead and asbestos was found, but a wide variety of other standard dust parameters that were found, plant material, things of that nature. it was very comprehensive as far as analyses. >> a before i go after the asbestos, was there any standard d like i talked about earlier, some scientist wills count and say not under five fibers or anything. you looked for fibers, so any fibers that were seen were -- >> there were no fibers seen. they go but structures. for t.e.m., it is structures. less than 70 structures per millimeter squared is a lot more stringent than p.c.m. which is phase contrast microscopy and this is the next level above osha. it is specific to asbestos. >> what about the radiological or however you say that? >> that is correct. that testing is yet to be done and is coming in january, mid january, by a certified health

physicist. he is certified to do this and will be doing a comprehensive screening of the property itself, inside, outside, crawlspace. >> how can we find out and e.p.a. went out and went public with this. how can we find out what recommendations they are making when it comes to the radiological part of it? >> for the e.p.a. stuff, that is for hunters point and is a general different standard than the occupational setting for building 606. they are separate. >> i don't understand that. so hunters point is for residential development. we have the building 606 and is that industrial use? >> that is an occupational setting. it is not a 24/7 occupied space, whereas a residential would be. the residential standards for all kinds of different parameters are a lot lower because you are intended to be if you want to use the term exposed for a lot longer and duration 24/7 and in occupational is mandated eight hours or vice versa.

>> a for the residential, it is more stringent testing because it is longer exposure. for building 606 it is occupational exposure and what is the time weighted average on an eight-hour day, is that what you are telling me? >> that is for osha is use time weighted average. we used e.p.a. modified testing in k-12 schools and the protocol modified to be specific to that site. but that was held to e.p.a. standards which is 70 structures or less. that is the same for schools, and we never got any structures found on any of the samples that we tested. >> so the question and this begs the question if we know we found a radiological and at hunters point they found that, but in that area of the shipyard t whole shipyard, why would we delay that testing until january? why wasn't that -- why wasn't that done first? >> so i can speak to that. so we had originally scheduled

to have radiological screening done by our certified occupational health -- excuse me, certified health physicist. we were planning on having it done this month. we had some contractual issues we needed to work out. those have been rectified and so now we're looking at getting him here in mid january. it pushed us back a little bit and contract and working out contract issues. >> you know, we have had cases where people worked on the nuclear submarines and even if they didn't work with the reactors, they have little tags on them to show if they have any type of radiological exposure. i didn't realize we were waiting six months or six -- started in june or september? when did we start to do this? the idea of start to do the testing? back in the summer. >> the california department of public health or us? >> us, when we started looking into this. >> we originally met with

members of building 606 in the end of july. and we came up with the plan of what the testing would look like. we had to actually kind of get all of the individuals that were going to be involved in the testing, the p.u.c., look for a sert fued health physicist and only a certain number of people that do this, find that, set the testing parameter, and make sure we are doing it the right way. and that we are not missing anything. it took time to build that and that is what we have been doing since then and doing the tests, and the final piece of the testing is the certified health physicist who is coming along in january after the first of the year. the other thing i want to stress is this is not a closed process by any means. it is more of a linear process in that we will have even after

the certified health physicist coming out and does his testing and issues his report, we will have continued testing, as i mentioned, and certainly as concerns and come up with other areas of the building as has in the past, those are met, documented, and necessary testing and we do that through the department of public health. i don't want this to seem like it is a closed process. >> no, no. and i appreciate that. i understand planning takes time and protocols need to be put in place and the right people need to be hired. i have this thought if it's going to take six or eight months to get this in place, would it be feasible or advise to believe put these tags on the people to see if there is any type of rating that they are exposed while you are waiting for it to put in place? if they have any radiological exposure. wonder if that is feasible or help nfl any way.

>> you were referring to --. >> they measure exposure radiological material and calculate what the body dose would be and is sent off to the body and analyze and accumulate throughout a year and the e.p.a. has set points for occupational settings, if radiological exposure versus civilian exposure. >> is that potentially a recommendation while we are waiting to put everything? in the six months, can we put a tag on people? >> that is not something that our health physicist has brought up as a concern for us. >> how about blood tests? any blood tests our people can take? >> some of the folks are being tested for the blood lead levels, but not specific for radiological presence. >> we know it leads to a lot of radiological testing and nuclear cleaning out there and stuff like that. i am just wondering if that is

in the forefront of the -- for a varietyover reasons, it is lagging. >> in regards to personal testing, the navy has personnel who are actively were acting on the site over periods of time. and they conduct testing and with the direct contact with the contaminated soil and potentially contaminated soil. we can request the data from them and the data they have shown so far that there hasn't been any exposures to individuals who were in direct contact and performing the surveys. and we can stress that tomorrow. >> would it be really expensive to put those on our people? or that is not really feasible? >> i don't think it's a recommendation that our health physicist would make at this point based on the building history and its location.

it is not necessary. but based on his report and in our survey and in january, we can make some further recommendations at that time. >> i don't know. i am still concerned about it. >> commissioner -- go ahead. >> an i want to ask all three of you gentlemen, i thank you for your work and your report. based on test results received to date, do you have a recommendation for this commission that we should do something immediately to remove the employees of the police department from 606 or any area there? >> i can speak to that and then certainly can have the department of public health also give their thoughts. but there has been no -- there has been nothing to date, nothing that the test results have shown in any of the teps that we have been taken that would indicate that we would have to take any immediate

action beyond the action that we have taken to protect the health and safety of the members of 606 and the people that work out there. as i said, at the beginning of the presentation, that is what's driving this is the health and safety of those people out there. and that they feel safe. and i think that's another big part of it. and so that is what we have done and if there was anything that we felt that needed to be done to protect their health and safety, we certainly could do that. and we haven't found that at this time. and we do have the regular meetings and regular communication with them to make sure they feel safe, too. that is the other big part of it, too. and meeting on monday and we did

address the issues. we left after monday with the report and in agreement with what we both just heard. >> thank you. >> commissioner? >> thanks, vice president mazzucco. and just, i may have missed this in a lot of the words that you used that i honestly don't understand. and a dec marker and that was positive for what? >> the dec marker and was found in parcel a1 similar in this area. i am not 100% certain where that was found. that was part of department of

public health survey scan for that area. and that marker made by the navy and had basically a radioactive material in the center that made it glow. that dec marker which came off the ship was buried in the soil. it was possibly dropped there and buried in the soil when they did their scans, they hit on that. they dug down, they pulled out that deck marker. they conducted tests of the soil that came out of that hole, and conducted tests of the hole and found that the radiation had come from that deck marker itself. and it hadn't moved to the surrounding soil. >> and you are using the term deck marker. what does that mean. a deck marker is a disc put on the deck of ships and is

basically like it would glow at night so they could sailors could see where they were walking. >> i understand. this is not -- is this some sort of radiological scanning that was being done for the area? correct. and that is already done for the district and that is done from parcel a1 and parcel a2 right here. the navy with the new round of testing will be conducting testing in parcel g which is

right across the street from parcel 606. that will begin in, i am told, march. and you don't have any concerns about anything along the lines of deck markers in parcel e and the area where building 606 is? >> that i can't speak to. i don't -- i don't know what is in the oil out there. what i can speak to is the building itself. and the immediate surrounding area. that is what we have been testing. that is what we have done the water tests to date for the radiation to determine if there is any radiation in the water right now, the soil, that came out of the back of 606 which is already been tested and the future testing that will be done by the certified health physicist on the radiological screen on that settled dust within the building and then the surrounding areas as well. >> okay. thank you. appreciate it. >> commissioner elias.

>> thank you for the presentation. i actually have a request that the information, specifically the results from the tests that you spoke of tonight, be disseminated to the district stations. when i was visiting district stations, officers had questions about the status of the 606 building and i know you said the presentation is on our website. i would like that information disseminated to them. it is my understanding that some had worked at building 606 way back in the day and i think they were interested to the status and what the results were and what the tests were being done. that would be my request. >> sure, certainly. and as you mention, we have them in electronic format on the commission's website, so we certainly can put that out for the membership as well. >> great, thank you. commissioner? >> thank you. just really quick, i wanted to make sure that just piggy backing on commissioner dejesus, one of the things that was most concerning is as we talked about the different levels and what we w