final restoration advisory board (rab) meeting minutes

DCN: TTEM-9008-FZ01-0015

Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest BRAC PMO West San Diego, CA FINAL RESTORATION ADVISORY BOARD (RAB) MEETING MINUTES FORMER MARE ISLAND NAVAL SHIPYARD VALLEJO, CALIFORNIA January 31, 2019

Approved for public release: distribution is unlimited

Final MINS RAB Meeting Minutes 1 January 31, 2019 TTEM-9008-FZ01-0015

FINAL MARE ISLAND NAVAL SHIPYARD Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Meeting Minutes January 31, 2019

The Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) for former Mare Island Naval Shipyard (MINS) held its regular meeting on Thursday, January 31, 2019, at the Mare Island Conference Center, 375 G Street, Vallejo, California. The RAB meeting started at 7:07 p.m. and adjourned at 9:05 p.m. These minutes contain a transcript of the discussions and presentations from the RAB Meeting.

RAB Community Members in Attendance:

• Myrna Hayes (Community Co-Chair) • Carol Philips

• Paula Tygielski

RAB Navy, Developers, Regulatory, and Other Agency Members in Attendance:

• Scott Anderson (Navy Co-Chair) • Valerie Harris (Navy Lead Project

Manager) • Nicholas Shih (Navy Project Manager) • Gavin McCreary (Department of Toxic

Substances Control [DTSC]) • Dwight Gemar (Weston Solutions)

• Elizabeth Wells (San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board [Regional Water Board])

• Sarabeth George (Regional Water Board) • Neal Siler (Lennar Mare Island) • Horus Nelson (Lennar Mare Island)

Community and Other Guests in Attendance:

• Nathan Bergeron • Elaine Foster • Jim Genn

• Daniel Glaze • Liz King • Fred Ousey

RAB Support in Attendance:

• Carolyn Hunter (Tetra Tech) • Doris Bailey (Stenographer)

• Wally NeVille (Audio Support)

I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS (Myrna Hayes [Community Co-Chair] and Scott Anderson [Navy Co-Chair])

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Okay. Welcome. Welcome to the January Mare Island RAB meeting. Thank you all for attending.

All the presentations and other paperwork are up on the front table.

We are going to be doing a couple presentations; one on the Navy FOST [Finding of Suitability to Transfer] process, just real briefly going over that.


And then next we are going to talk about the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office [DRMO] Proper FOST that we have out as a draft right now.

And then Neal is going to do a presentation on the Eastern Early Transfer Parcel Update and Path Forward for 2019. So hopefully you guys will enjoy that.

We will go through real quick and do introductions.

My name is Scott Anderson, the BRAC [Base Realignment and Closure] Environmental Coordinator for the Navy.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: I'm Myrna Hayes. I'm the Community Co-Chair for the Restoration Advisory Board and I live in Vallejo.

MS. HARRIS: My name is Valerie Harris, I'm the Lead Remedial Project Manager with the Navy for Mare Island.

MR. GEMAR: Dwight Gemar with Weston.

MS. WELLS: I'm Elizabeth Wells with the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board.

MS. GEORGE: I'm Sarabeth George, and I'm with the Regional Water Board.

MR. NELSON: Horus Nelson, Lennar Mare Island.

MR. MCCREARY: Gavin McCreary, Department of Toxic Substances Control.

MS. PHILLIPS: Carol Phillips with the City of Vallejo as a community member.

MR. SHIH: Nicholas Shih, Project Manager with the Navy.

MR. GENN: Jimmy Genn, resident of Vallejo.

MR. SILER: Neal Siler, Lennar Mare Island.

MR. GLAZE: Daniel Glaze, Mare Island resident.

MR. OUSEY: Fred Ousey, Enviro-Tech Services.

MS. FOSTER: I'm Elaine Foster. I'm a resident of Vallejo and interested in the history of Mare Island and recording it.

MR. BERGERON: Nathan Bergeron, Nimitz Group.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Again, welcome, and thank you, everybody.

II. PRESENTATION (Scott Anderson and Nicholas Shih [Navy]) Overview of the Navy's Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST) Process and Transfer of Parcel XVII – Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office Proper (FOST 17)

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: It has been a couple of years since the Navy has transferred property at Mare Island, and Myrna had mentioned at the last RAB meeting that it might be good to talk about the FOST and what we have got coming up as far as for the transfer happening -- that we hope to have happen this year. So we thought this would be a good opportunity since we do have a number of FOST documents this year, including one that Nick will be talking about and highlighting a little bit later.


In this first part of the presentation, I wanted to give a little bit of an outline of what a Finding of Suitability to Transfer, or FOST, is and what is involved in that.

It was originally developed as part of Base Realignment and Closure. We wanted a DoD [Department of Defense]-wide process to assess, determine, and document the environmental suitability of properties that would be transferred by deed.

The FOST process also ensures the protection of human health and the environment.

And also ensures compliance with applicable environmental cleanup requirements and compliance with Section 120(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, or what I will be calling CERCLA for the rest of the night because that is a long one to keep talking about.

And what Section 120(h) is, that is the CERCLA warranty that the Navy gives that the property being transferred has met all of the regulatory requirements and is suitable for transfer.

It also allows for, that if something is -- it's also kind of called the “come-back clause,” that if things are found on the property after transfer that require investigation or remediation, it is the United States Government who is responsible for those come-backs.

The FOST is an internal DoD document. It summarizes all the environmental work that has been completed and all the various regulatory agency approvals and concurrences.

The FOST details the petroleum products, CERCLA hazardous materials, and also gives notices on asbestos, lead-based paint, pesticides, PCBs [polychlorinated biphenyls], and all those different types of issues.

The FOST document is only signed by the Navy; however, there are agreements between the Navy and regulatory agencies for their review and comment. Thus, agency comments and the Navy’s responses to those comments are attached to the FOST.

And then any unresolved agency comments that we may have are included as an appendix within the FOST.

Then the FOST is attached to the signed deed and it provides the various notifications for petroleum, asbestos, lead-based paint, and also identifies the land use controls requirements if they are needed.

Potentially some of the things that are found in a FOST include a hazardous substance notification table. It talks about all the potential hazardous substances that were stored or used on that site or parcel.

The FOST details all the CERCLA responses and corrective actions that have taken place, all of the related approvals, and it has references to those various documents within the document itself.

There is a notification on the presence of petroleum products that were used on the site.

And then the FOST also provides tables and documentation for all the closures and removals of USTs and ASTs through the petroleum program.

The FOST will talk about munitions and explosives of concern [MEC] and any response actions that have taken place.


And then there are notifications and potentially abatements for asbestos and lead-based paint. And there are notifications on PCBs that were used on the site, or for pesticides, if they were used on the site, there are potential notifications.

And, like I said, we have some transfers that will hopefully happen in Fiscal Year 2019.

The first FOST that we have as a draft right now with the agencies is for the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office Proper, or DRMO Proper FOST. And Nick is going to be presenting that in a couple of minutes. I have a figure coming up next.

So the DRMO FOST covers this property right here.

We have another FOST that is in the works for the Historic Housing Area, which is up in this area.

Another one that is coming up is for the Western Magazine Area.

And then also we have a FOST that was completed, and that we got agency concurrence on from both the Regional Water Board and DTSC in October and December of 2018. And that is for this parcel here, XV-B(1).

So we are looking forward to transferring some property. And I know that the City of Vallejo is also anticipating those transfers. And it has been a couple of years since we last transferred property, so it is an exciting time for us.

And what we potentially can do during future RAB meetings, if there's enough interest based on what we talk about tonight, is doing presentations on these FOSTs coming up in the near future.

So that is all I have. I know it was a quick, brief overview but I didn't want to take up too much time before Nick's presentation.

Are there any questions on the FOST process and the FOST document itself?

(No response.)

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: All right. Nick is going to talk about the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office, or DRMO FOST.

MR. SHIH: Okay. Good evening, everyone. As Scott mentioned, my name is Nick Shih. I'm a project manager with the Navy.

The Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office, otherwise known as the DRMO, is one of the projects that I manage and, as Scott also mentioned, sits on one of the parcels of land that we are looking to transfer to the City of Vallejo in 2019.

And we thought tonight would be a great opportunity to present a general overview of the DRMO.

Tonight, we will talk about where the site is on Mare Island and some general background details: What is the DRMO? What did they do at that DRMO on Mare Island? Three significant historical removal actions that happened at the site. And how those removal actions led to the milestone documents that set up transfer of the property upcoming up in 2019.

The DRMO is located on the southwest corner of Azuar Drive and A Street and also what was formerly known as Dump Road. The causeway is here on G Street, and you can see the sports facility here. And this is the road that takes you to the San Pablo Bay nature hiking trail.


The DRMO is about 8.5 acres in size or in area.

And according to the Mare Island Specific Plan, this area is designated for future use as commercial/ industrial property.

So the DRMO was the Department of Defense organization on military bases where they managed excess property and materials for disposal, recycling, and also for reuse by others in the DoD or on the military base.

And specifically at Mare Island, the DRMO started as a scrapyard in the early 1940s -- this is about World War II era -- for managing surplus shipyard materials and scrap metal.

And when it started in the 1940s and all the way up to mid-1995 when base closure activities started, the DRMO also had stored electrical transformers, lead acid batteries, paper baling activities were done there, and also handling of petroleum oils.

And in addition to these activities, investigations before base closure and during closure found that some other items were also mixed in with the scrap metal that was brought to the site as a scrapyard. And these were munitions and low-level radiological items that were discovered.

Examples of these, or some of the typical things that we find on Mare Island sites, are small radioluminescent low-level radiological dials and deck markers. Radioluminescent meaning glow-in-the-dark. So these materials, like dials and deck markers, would be painted with radium paint or coated with radium paint so that the sailors could see them in the dark or when the lights were off.

The common examples of munitions items that we found at this site were mostly inert cartridge casings, but also some live ammunition have been found there throughout the history of the DRMO.

And so going through this list and seeing all these materials, you get a glimpse of the sources of materials and contaminants and hazards that were at the site; oils, lead from the lead batteries, polychlorinated biphenyls from the transformers, heavy metals, munitions, low-level radiological items. A whole host of things.

This is an aerial photograph from 1951 showing what the site looked like then. You'll see this dashed line that goes down here within the site boundary that was a former fence line, and that enclosed the primary activity at the site, the scrapyard activity. And this is known in all of our documents as the Fenced Scrapyard Area. And so this is the primary kind of storage and processing activity that happened at the site.

This is what the site looks like pretty much present day. Everything has been razed and cleared from the site. Just low-lying seasonal vegetation exists there. And you have got these two storage Quonset huts in the southeast corner that are the only remaining buildings on the site.

And even though this dashed line is still here on this figure, that fence line has been removed and replaced with a newer fence line to try to keep folks out.

This slide shows a list -- not a comprehensive list -- but just a list of the selected milestones that I wanted to display and talk about for the site.

The list begins with the first investigation activity in 1983, followed later by the three removal actions that I'll talk about: radiological removal action, non-time critical removal action, and a


petroleum corrective action. Some of the decision documents are listed after that. And then all the way to the Finding of Suitability to Transfer that we recently submitted this past year, over 35 years later from when we started.

So the first removal action I wanted to discuss was the radiological removal action. In 1995, before the base closed, the Navy conducted general radioactive material surveys -- these were also known as G-RAM -- at a number of sites on Mare Island.

In those initial G-RAM surveys, we discovered a significant amount of those low-level radiological items that we talked about, those deck markers and dials, in the scrapyard. That survey, combined with some of the other environmental investigations we did in the 1980s and in the 1990s, also discovered chemical contaminants as well as munitions at the site.

And so, based on these multiple contaminants, these multiple hazards, and a lot of complicated issues, we were dealing with all of those things at once; the Navy made the proposal to try to cap the scrapyard area to contain the contaminants on site, and then come back after base closure to try to resolve those issues instead of trying to take care of all those issues before the base closed in 1996.

But the state, and from community input during the Restoration Advisory Board meetings --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: You know, that kind of really just chaps me right now.

MR. SHIH: Okay.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Why didn't you put the Restoration Advisory Board in your presentation today? We were the drivers behind --

MS. TYGIELSKI: We sure did.

MR. SHIH: Yeah.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Let Paula take over.

MR. SHIH: No, I understand.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: That's annoying.

MR. SHIH: My intent -- there was no ill will in my intent.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Oh, no. No. But that's not the problem.

MR. SHIH: Okay.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: I understand where you are coming from, but I think that would be, you know, what we were kind of anticipating when we use the word community.

MR. SHIH: Community.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: I mean, that's the public --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: This is a landmark issue for this Restoration Advisory Board and for this community and for the Navy and for the regulators. And for you to gloss it over and just say there was state and community input is just preposterous.

If you can please, whenever you have the opportunity, mention the Restoration Advisory Board by name. It is to be early and often communication. It's a law. And it's to be early and often


communication with the community about plans for environmental cleanup and environmental cleanup.

It's just, you know, don't try to explain yourselves; no, you didn't intend it, it wasn't ill will. But we have the right to say that stinks, because we were the drivers behind the ships, the Navy ships. So to say that it was just a general somebody, some community input somewhere.

MS. TYGIELSKI: This is something we pat ourselves on the back for.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: No, I understand. That's great.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: And we can be mad. We can be mad tonight. I don't know, maybe Paula is not, but I am. And we were there, we have been here since before you guys -- well, some of you were probably not even born. But we've been on this RAB for 24, you know, since April of 1994. So --

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: No. I'll apologize, but, I mean, there was not anything --

MR. SHIH: No, I created this presentation.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Well, I don't care who created it -- I imagine you did, Nick. And I'm just saying, there is a big error in the message right there, right now. You could just scratch in Restoration Advisory Board community input if you want.

MR. SHIH: Okay.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: It wasn't the mayor, it wasn't the newspaper, it was us.

MR. SHIH: Okay.

MS. TYGIELSKI: I remember giving a presentation and asking, you know, you really don't know what you have at that site, you have to investigate it further. And that is how they figured out that all the radiation they were worried about was those little deck markers.

MR. SHIH: I completely understand. It was my intent to give credit to the community, to the Restoration Advisory Board, but by omitting the actual Restoration Advisory Board title, that was a mistake.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Thank you.

MR. SHIH: So the temporary cap proposal was rescinded and the Navy ended up actually moving forward with the work based on the Restoration Advisory Board input and their help in prioritizing the work for Mare Island.

The follow-up surveys, radiological scans and soil sampling for radiological impacts, removal of some of the discrete items that they found as well as impacted soil, and the confirmation surveys and soil sampling that they did afterward, ended up actually being completed within about a year's time. And that work received a no further action concurrence in, I believe it was, the spring of 1997, which was a monumental effort to try to get something done within a year.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Sure was.

MR. SHIH: Especially for a project of that magnitude, which also included screening the soil that came out of the ground for munitions items.


CO-CHAIR HAYES: And if it wasn't for us and the State of California’s Department of Toxic Substances Control, it would still be languishing there today. That's my opinion, because the Navy said they couldn't figure out how to get to the radiological items, they didn't have the capability of doing it. And we pressed and pushed, and amazingly, the Navy brought out --

MR. SHIH: I think it was somebody from the local college.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: -- a captain, an officer. He took charge of the project. They brought out a new technology. We got to go on site and watch it being used. So we got some confidence there.

But I think the important thing that, you know -- I'm just going to go on, you may never get to another page -- because some of these folks who are here tonight, they weren't here; but they live here, they have investments, they have potential investments.

And if you don't want Mare Island to go the way of Hunters Point, then when you are talking about radiological, when you are talking about munitions, when you are talking about difficult projects, I think that we deserve, as the members of the Restoration Advisory Board, we are here collectively together.

MS. TYGIELSKI: We deserve a pat on the back.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: We deserve to be able to demonstrate that we were a part of it, that there is a credibility to the work that you did. That if these folks trust us at all, they can then trust you in this presentation.

That is what is so disappointing right now because it is a complex issue, it was a difficult project site. I imagine a lot of people are curious about why it is still fenced, why it isn't transferred. It's at the entrance of a nature trail, running and walking trail. There's other cleanup that has been done around it. People are probably curious.

You no longer put your signs up on your properties like we used to encourage you to do and like you used to do.

So I'm just saying that the more credibility that you can give us, as people who were actually there when nobody else was there, just Paula and me, then the more trusting the people who are here with us tonight can be about your presentation.

MR. SHIH: Thank you.

So the next removal action was when the Navy returned in 2005 for the remaining contaminants that were not part of the radiological removal.

These included metals, polychlorinated biphenyls, pesticides, and semi-volatile organic compounds; and clearing the site of munitions and explosives of concern.

This slide can be paired with the next page on your handout, and it is also included in the back of your handouts as a figure that actually shows this excavation activity where the initial scope of work was for us to excavate the first top 1.5 feet of soil below the ground surface across that entire Fenced Scrapyard Area; and to screen that soil and sift out and look for any munitions items; as well as to collect soil samples to confirm whether or not there were any contaminants remaining in the ground surface.


And it ended up that the excavation expanded outside of the Fenced Scrapyard Area and went deeper than the 1.5 fee below ground surface all the way up to 8.5 feet below ground surface.

We ended up removing 21,700 cubic yards.

And only 11 MEC items were actually found in that scrapyard area, all within that top 18 inches below ground surface, nothing deeper and nothing outside of that scrapyard.

This is the figure that I was referring to that shows you a visual aid of how that removal proceeded.

And so this is the Fenced Scrapyard Area.

The lighter green areas are where the excavation only went down to 1.5 feet.

The darker areas are where the excavation went deeper.

As you can see, it's a significant portion, almost all of the site was excavated down to at least that 1.5 feet below ground surface.

So this was another successful step in the removal of some of the hazards and contaminants that remained at the site.

The third soil removal project was the petroleum corrective action.

We returned in 2009 so that we could focus only on petroleum-impacted soil when there was more funding and after we had taken care of some of the other higher priorities first.

And for this excavation, we have a follow-up figure on the next page to show you the actual area.

An additional 7.2 acres ended up being removed just to focus on petroleum, which included portions within the DRMO site and even expanded outside of the DRMO. It also reached 21 feet below ground surface, which is very deep, and was 116,000 cubic yards in volume, which was 8 times the volume from the previous removal action that we had conducted.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: And if I remember correctly, this was that kind of messy oil cleanup project that you guys did -- Dwight, Weston Solutions, that you guys, you did -- it had a bunch of metal debris, desks and chairs and stuff, where it allowed the oil to go. It had a preferential pathway through that stuff. And you cleaned that all up and you went out into what is now Azuar Drive for some distance, and --

MR. GEMAR: The big dig.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: The big dig.

MR. SHIH: I do remember looking at some of the old meeting minutes where it was referred to as the big dig.

And these were the areas here on the east and on the west where the removal was done.

And the funny thing about this figure is that this actually shows the Navy's portion of the removal. You have this clean, straight boundary line here, but the actual removal of all the material extended out into this area, which you see was cleared, because this is backfill material. And over here, this was actually conducted by LMI [Lennar Mare Island].

So the main point here is this was a very large-scale removal that happened both within the DRMO and extended outside the DRMO, continuing to remove more of the contaminants and


hazards. This third removal action or soil excavation removal was to just remove any of those contaminants that remained in the soil.

So after all of those soil removal actions and the follow-up reports and investigations were completed, the Navy presented the Proposed Plan for the DRMO during the July 2014 Restoration Advisory Board meeting. Actually, I should say Dwight from Weston presented the Proposed Plan at the July 2014 meeting.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: It doesn't say that either, RAB. It's as if we don't exist.

MR. SHIH: And the Navy --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: You know, can I make another complaint on the record?

The Restoration Advisory Board does not typically, or we are not required to, hold public meetings in the RAB meeting, but we have graciously and in partnership with or in approval of DTSC, we have made a bit of an exception so that you don't have to have multiple meetings.

But it would have been really nice, once again, and if you could kind of keep this in mind, or more than kind of, it would be courteous of you to reference, again, that that meeting was a Restoration Advisory Board meeting.

MR. SHIH: I understand that.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: There's room on the line, you don't have a shortage there. And again, we allow, really, I as the Community Co-Chair, and my Navy Co-Chair, have a conversation and we decide whether we will allow a public meeting to concurrently take place in a Restoration Advisory Board meeting.

Particularly, now that we are meeting only once every two months, it really can impact our ability to just conduct regular early and often communication about environmental cleanup.

So again, if you need me to review these documents before you come to the next meeting, I'd be happy to have you shoot those to me and I can review that. Then it won't have to be, you know, in public. I'm not accusing anybody of anything, I'm not trying to get you in trouble, but I just think, for the record, it's courteous. It would be correct to make sure that you also show that.

Because sometime along the way you're going to say that the Restoration Advisory Board is irrelevant, that it's not worth the DoD funding any longer. That's happened to a lot of Restoration Advisory Boards. And so we want to show that we are serving the Navy and the other responsible parties and the agencies by allowing these co-meetings to take place, because these are public record meetings conducted through the CERCLA process, is my understanding, right?

MR. SHIH: I understand. And I'll share the feedback with our other group of project managers to make sure we are more sensitive to that in the future presentations.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Thank you.

MR. SHIH: So, we talked about the removals in soil and we talked about how there were three of them, and they had significantly removed a large area of the site, almost all the site, and to such a great depth that there was no further action remaining to be done for soil.


But in the Navy's conservative approach for some of the residual contaminants that remained in the groundwater, the Navy proposed a remedy of implementing institutional controls, or land use controls or prohibition, to prevent domestic use of shallow groundwater.

During the Restoration Advisory Board meeting, and in written comments to the Navy in response to the Proposed Plan, the public questioned why there would be a need for these types of institutional controls for groundwater because the site was not going to be used for domestic use; that is to say, the site wasn't going to be used for residential properties, so nobody would be living there because it was slated for industrial and commercial use. And also not -- at the time, nor historically, and not in the future, would groundwater be used by people living on this site.

It was not anticipated that people would be extracting groundwater and using it for their potable water source in their homes. Also, the shallow water bearing zone of the groundwater, where the residual contaminants are, is also saline in nature, it's too salty, so it's not even usable as a potable water source.

And so the exposure to residents to groundwater was unlikely, so the question was a valid question that the Navy took into account, revisited all the data and all these conditions that I just talked about, and agreed with the state that institutional controls would not be necessary and that it would still be protective to human health.

And with that, we ended up accomplishing a no further action Record of Decision in September of 2016, meaning that there would be no restrictions on the site and the site would be closed.

This is a benefit to the Navy and the City of Vallejo for not having any restrictions on the property and for the Navy to not have any future liabilities for work that would have to be done to make sure that those land use controls in place were being followed.

After the Record of Decision, we can move forward with the final step before property transfer, which is what Scott talked about, the Finding of Suitability to Transfer. We submitted the FOST as a draft to the regulatory agencies in November of 2018, last year.

We anticipate finalizing that this spring 2019, and then hopefully transferring the property to the City of Vallejo in 2019, which we are very excited about.

And we are also excited about the number of other properties that Scott talked about and are looking to transfer in 2019. Hopefully, those FOSTs will be the subject of some of the future Restoration Advisory Board meeting presentations.

That concludes my presentation for this evening about the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office site.

Does anybody have any other questions or comments?

Sure. Hi.

MR. GLAZE: Just curious where the 180,000 yards of dirt went, to a hazardous waste site or somewhere else?

MR. SHIH: It probably went to a landfill. I'm not sure. I'd have to check the documents and get back to you on that. I'll put that down as one of the comments and we'll respond to it.

MR. GEMAR: It went to Investigation Area (IA) H1.


MR. SHIH: Oh, yeah, that's right. That's right. It actually ended up going to the on-site landfill. The Mare Island -- let's see.

There's a landfill, or there was a landfill that was further --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: There still is it turns out.

MR. SHIH: Over here. It was used to fill in the landfill site here.

MR. GLAZE: So it didn't go outside?

MR. SHIH: It stayed on-site.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Dwight Gemar with Weston, since that was --

MR. GLAZE: That's fine.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Since that was your project, Dwight --

MR. GLAZE: I don't need --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Well, maybe because you asked, maybe since these are court-reported minutes, it would be helpful for people in the future, reading it, to have Dwight's answer.

Thank you, Dan, though for --

MR. GLAZE: Sure.

MR. GEMAR: Yeah. There is a former landfill about a half mile west along Dump Road. That was the Navy's main disposal area from the 1940s until the shipyard -- well, until the late 1980s.

So through some efforts with the regulators and in coordination with several meetings that we have had here at the Restoration Advisory Board meeting, the Department of Toxic Substances Control did approve the use of the former landfill to accept some additional materials from other sites, including the DRMO, as part of our landfill closure process. So that waste was placed in that area prior to an engineered cap installed on that area.

Also, there is a perimeter groundwater extraction system and barrier around the entire 72-acre area that we have been extracting groundwater from since 2005. So it's secure in that location at the former IA H1 landfill area.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Thank you. I just have a couple of questions; they are pretty small ones, but they matter to me since I have driven along that road every night since December of 2010 checking the parking lot and closing the gate, the road to Dump Road, we call it here, as you can see.

I was told by a Navy staffer that used to work in San Diego for you that at least one of these Quonset huts is the last remaining World War II Submarine Force residential housing unit. And there were like 300 of them. And that has been moved onto the DRMO scrapyard just by the Navy.

Now, I know that the City of Vallejo will receive that; I assume they will, anyway, as a personal property or whatever that agreement is in the Economic Development Conveyance.

Our non-profit organization, Mare Island Heritage Trust, has a commitment to providing for public access where it is planned on Mare Island. And to that end, we manage the Mare Island Shoreline Heritage Preserve and co-founded it in 2008.


What we have learned from some former residents of the island, and of the Navy Historic Housing Area, Naval Ammunition Depot Historic Housing Area, is that at one time, one of those Quonset huts was actually placed after the war at that housing area. And we know two different individuals who lived in that Quonset hut. It was -- they are duplexes.

And so we would like to, and I would like to, as the president of the Mare Island Heritage Trust, but also as an interested community member, I would like to ask the city and the Navy to work closely with us regarding the ultimate disposition of one or both of those Quonset huts.

I have not been inside of them. I was only told by a Navy employee -- Dave -- oh, boy. What was his last name? He was --

MR. GEMAR: Godsey.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Godsey. That that is the very last remaining one. And we believe that has tremendous historical significance and should be protected as other historic and cultural resources on the island are.

So if there is any way you can work with us or other historical groups on the island or community groups, we would very much like to at least document it before you destroy it, if that is what you're obsessed with doing. But we believe there is a purpose for keeping it.

We have interior photos from people who actually did live there, and we have exterior photos as well of people we now have met; including a woman who is the docent at the state park in Benicia, she lived there in the Naval Ammunition Depot in one of these structures when she was five years old.

The only other thing that I will just comment on is the DRMO scrapyard has become, it appears, a factory for pampas grass -- which is extremely invasive. Almost up there with Arundo in terms of the difficulty in removing it once it gets started.

And they are fairly small shrubs or perennial grasses right now. If there is some way that both on the Dump Road entrance, a few small ones, and then within the DRMO, you could remove those, it would be better for nature.

That's it.

MR. SHIH: Thank you.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Thanks, Nick.

MR. SILER: Okay. So you know, I'm going to indoctrinate Scott here tonight because, if I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times, the Navy is a tough act to follow.

And one thing that you forgot, one facility you forgot to mention in the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office that has been there, beside the Quonset huts, for about 15 years; there is an office chair that sits right in the middle of the DRMO, and I just wonder what is with that office chair?


III. PRESENTATION (Neal Siler [Lennar Mare Island]) Eastern Early Transfer Parcel Update and Path Forward for 2019

MR. SILER: Okay. I'm going to talk about the progress that we have made on the Eastern Early Transfer Parcel and what we plan to do in 2019 and 2020. This is good news, to tell you the truth.

So what I'm going to do is just talk about some of the major submittals, the activities we initiated, performed, and completed in 2018. And then I'm going to talk to you about some of the things we are trying to get done in 2020.

So I'm going to talk about the big picture first. And what this slide [Slide 3] shows you is all of the areas that are outlined in blue are areas that are closed.

The most recent area that we closed was Investigation Area C3, which is right along the waterfront right here. This area right here. And this was closed in December of 2018.

So you can see the only ones that we have left are Investigation Areas C1 and C2, which were the most heavily industrialized areas on the island. And there is one other small area that we have to close, and that is Investigation Area D1.3-Central. And that is the Building 84 Area that we are talking about, which is this area right here.

Investigation Area C2 is this area right here on the south side of the Eastern Early Transfer Parcel.

And Investigation Area C1 is right on the northeastern side of the Eastern Early Transfer Parcel.

Now, there were about 1,000 sites that had to be investigated and remediated in the Eastern Early Transfer Parcel. About 500 of those are located in Investigation Areas C1 and C2.

Now, the good news is that of those 1,000 sites, all we have is 12 more to deal with. So there's about six in Investigation Area C1, about five in Investigation Area C2, and just this one here, Building 84/84A in Investigation Area D1.3-Central.

So how did we get to this point? Well, let's talk about each of these investigation areas.

In Investigation Area C1, we worked at a number of those sites.

Building 91 Polychlorinated Biphenyl Site UL#01. And that also has the distinct footprint of not only being a polychlorinated biphenyl, or PCB, site, it has elemental mercury that is underneath the floorboards in that area. The PCBs are easy to deal with. The elemental mercury is something that is more difficult to deal with because it has a volatilization air component that we have to go ahead and deal with. We've investigated that.

We have actually done some remediation, Phase 1 of the remediation. We are going to be doing different phases of the remediation as we move forward in 2019.

We had a fuel oil pipeline that was right along Nimitz Avenue right here. It was Fuel-Oil Pipeline H1/X/Building 207S. We have remediated that pipeline.

And if you have been on the island recently, you've noticed that we have Nimitz Avenue blocked off again there. We had some failures in some of the backfill material. It wasn't the fault of the contractor, I believe. There's a lot of undifferentiated fill on the island. There's a lot of utilities, subsurface utilities that show up on maps, some that don't show up on maps. And it was just a


problem of all this, and water infiltration, that actually made those areas fail. We are actually fixing those right now. Hopefully we will get those done here, if not next week, the week after next.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Not putting any pressure on you, but I have the Flyway Festival coming up a week from tomorrow. If there is any way that you can make that temporary closure go away during that weekend -- safely, you know -- because I'm going to be crazed trying to write a sign, because our festival, as you know, is at the end of Nimitz or at the, you know, the pedestrian area of Nimitz where it's closed off. And it's going to be a nightmare to try to make a jog-around around that. I'm dreading a lengthy description for people on the --

MR. SILER: Well, Myrna, I think we can help you with that. We have maps that show you how to get around that area. And so --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Yeah, but I have like 2,000 people coming who aren't going to look at a map for a minute.

MR. SILER: And you can blast that out to those people.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: No, I can't.

MR. SILER: I'll try. I'll try to get that done.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: They just appear.

MR. SILER: I can't promise to get that done.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Yeah.

MR. SILER: It's all dependent right now on weather.


MR. SILER: We've got it pretty much backfilled, but --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: You can't trench plate it or anything?

MR. SILER: No, some of those places are too wide to do that.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Okay.

MR. SILER: So it's going to be a problem. But we'll try to get that done.

Right now we have the paving contractor set up for next Friday. We hope to get him in there on Wednesday. The problem is that the weather is the issue right now.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Yeah, I know. I know.

MR. SILER: As it keeps raining, they have other sites they have to do, it keeps getting pushed back and pushed back. I'll try to do everything I can to get it open, but I can't promise it right now.


MR. SILER: But I'll do everything I can to do that for you.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: All right.


MR. SILER: Other areas that we have to deal with are Installation Restoration Program Site 15. We have done the fifth enhanced reductive dechlorination event right now there. We hope that that's going to be it. We are hoping to go ahead and start our compliance monitoring to get that site closed out.

We have a couple of areas that are right on top of each other. Domestic Pump Station 6 (DOM-6) and the Cooling Water Loop–Intake Arm, which are right down here.

We are actually going to work on those starting next week, so hopefully those will all be taken care of here in 2019.

So as you can see, we want to get everything associated with these sites done, get our Remedial Action Plan [RAP] submitted, and move along so we can close out this site in 2020.

So Investigation Area C2. At this site, we have done work at a number of different polychlorinated biphenyl, or PCB, sites: Building 688 UL#01, Building 742 UL#02, Building 746 and 746A UL#01 on both of those sites.

Those projects are completed. We think they are done. We're waiting for the regulatory agencies to get back to us.

We still have work to do at Building 116 PCB Site.

We believe we are done at Cistern 36, which is actually inside Building 46, the Mare Island Museum. But we think we have a path forward to get that closed out.

We have some sanitary sewer sites where we have to do some water level measurements at those sites, pretty innocuous. That should go pretty well.

And try to get this Investigation Area C2 RAP done.

We just got additional comments back from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control; hopefully, we will get that out there in the next month or so in order to finalize that.

So as you can see, we want to finish Building 116 PCB Site UL#01. There is one other area that is a larger site, and that is Building 206/208 Area, which is right south of Building 1310 and north of the Building 386/388/390 complex. We hope to get that work done this spring. Moving along with that.

And at that point, we should be able to complete all the remedial actions in Investigation Area C2 so we can close that area.

So Investigation Area C3. And this has been the jewel in the crown for 2018. We were able to get all of the polychlorinated biphenyl sites closed out in those areas; all of the land use covenants; the operation and maintenance plans finalized; everything recorded and executed so that everybody was happy with it; and get the pre-decision covenant released.

And in December of 2018, we were able to get certification from the regulatory agencies that all remedial actions were completed. So that is 48 additional acres that we were able to complete and get back into the closure status of that area.

So the only thing we have left right now is to get the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act warranty from the Navy.

And once we do that, everything is done in Investigation Area C3.


Last, but not least, we have Investigation Area D1.3, which are little areas that we broke out of Investigation Area D1.2 to close that area out and move along.

There is a northern site, which are Buildings 733 and 737, which is the Success Center on the island.

We have a central site, which is the Building 84/84A Area.

And we have a south side, D1.3-Ssouth, which is just an area that was right on the fringe of the former western shoreline.

So D1.3-North, D1.3South are both closed out. We are working with the regulatory agencies to get closure for no further remedial actions in those areas.

The one area that we have to deal with is Investigation Area D1.3-Central. And I have commitment from the project manager of that area that she is going to give a presentation at the March RAB meeting so that you can see what is going on at that site.


MR. SILER: Okay. So just to give you an idea of where we have been and where we are today. We have closed out or received closure for no further remedial actions -- that's completion -- and that is 464 acres of the 663 acres of the Eastern Early Transfer Parcel. That's about 70 percent of this site.

There is an Underground Storage Tank Program. We closed out one site in 2018. But we only have three sites left, and they are Oil houses 434 and 862 and Cistern 36. And once those are done, we are done with the underground storage tank sites.

We have one fuel oil pipeline site that we have to close out, and that is the H1/X/Building 207S. Once we're done with that, it's all done.

We closed out seven PCB sites, or polychlorinated biphenyl sites, in 2018. That is 565 out of 570 sites, or 99 percent. We just want to close those out in 2019 and get that all done.

It is our goal to get all of the remedial actions, investigations, anything else we have to do physically at those 12 sites that I talked about done in 2019, so 2020 is just a year of compliance monitoring and a documentation completion exercise.

So here is where we are. 2019, as I mentioned, complete the fieldwork of those 12 remaining sites. Get the implementation reports for all those sites ready. Get them into the regulatory agencies.

Submit the Investigation Area-wide Land Use Covenants for regulatory agency review.

Complete operation and maintenance plans for a number of different sites where we have engineering controls. There are about 12 sites on the island for that. Some of those are done; some of those we still need to complete.

Prepare and submit the Investigation Area C1 Remedial Action Plan. That has kind of lagged a little bit because we are trying to get the Investigation Area C2 Remedial Action Plan done. And we will take all the lessons we learned from that and apply those to the Investigation Area C1 Remedial Action Plan and get it done.

Initiate all that groundwater compliance monitoring at a number of different sites there.


In 2020, our goal is to get everything done and everything taken care of.

Right now, our goal is to get Investigation Area C1 and C2 done by December of 2020. If we can get them done earlier, we'll get them done earlier.

So that is the sum of my presentation. If anybody has any questions, please let me know and I'll be glad to answer them for you.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: When did the Eastern Early Transfer Parcel take place, 2002?

MR. SILER: The transfer took place in 2002, that's correct. Remember, we started the consent agreement and everything, all the orders were in 2001.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: One?

MR. SILER: Yeah.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: I remember being at that really tremendous event, you know, as you set out on this mission. And I'll never forget the five-year commitment.

MR. SILER: I want to tell you --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: But you're --

MR. SILER: Yeah.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: You're knocking it out, Neal, I gotta say.

MR. SILER: I want to tell you that we have submitted documents that we didn't get back in our hands until five years later from the regulatory agencies. So it's kind of tough to get it done in five years sometimes.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Yeah. Yeah. It's a monster.

MR. SILER: Oh, yeah. It is that.

Any other questions from anybody?

(No response.)

MR. SILER: Thank you very much.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Thank you, Neal.

That brings us to the public comment period. Are there any comments from the public?

IV. FIRST PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Elaine, you want to go?

MS. FOSTER: Um --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: I'll help you; okay?

MS. FOSTER: Okay.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: So I invited Elaine very specifically here tonight because she has an opportunity that I think some of you in the engineering field or your contractors will be able to help her with.


And since I don't quite understand what it is, could you just explain briefly your project, and then the specific equipment you need some help with.

It's a really cool project she's working on. She'll tell you.

MS. FOSTER: Sure. So I'm a student getting my Masters in historical archaeology. And because I just returned here and learned about the cemetery, I wanted to map out the cemetery with a total station, and possibly GPS, in order to get a really accurate map of the tombstones in relation and location to each other.

And then afterwards, I'm going to gather some historical information, cross-reference with the iconography on the tombstones, and then do an analysis of any cultural trends or patterns that may emerge based on the placement of different tombstones, different people of different backgrounds, and things like that.

So I'd really like some help mapping out the cemetery at some point. Just getting the general placement of where the tombstones are with the total station, if anyone has one of those.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Nobody's raising their hand. But I felt like, you know, folks in this room would be more likely to have access to or know someone who might have access to, who might want to help her on this project. It's 2.5 acres.

And it is slated for some pretty draconian and dramatic renovation potentially with a lot of different agencies involved.

And so far, the National Park Service hasn't been engaged, and the State Historic Preservation Office, to our knowledge, hasn't been engaged. And so it's just a really cool opportunity that Elaine came along, who grew up here in Vallejo, and returned back here from the southeast.

And if there is anyone who could help her just get this done -- in timely for her master's thesis, but also as importantly timely before any changes start taking place, so that we at least have a historic baseline for the cemetery as it is now.

And if you know what a total station is, I don't, but --

MS. FOSTER: It's an electronic distance measuring device. So you measure distances electronically. You set up a little tripod and then you have a -- anyway --


MS. FOSTER -- that's neither here nor there.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: But I bet that some of you in this industry know what she's talking about. So if you could just hook up with her as we take our break, that would be really great.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Thank you very much.

Any other public comments?

(No response.)

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Nope. I think we're up for a ten-minute break. How about we get back here at 8:25?

(Thereupon there was a brief recess.)


V. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS (Myrna Hayes [Community Co-Chair] and Scott Anderson [Navy Co-Chair])

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: All right. I think we're going to get started.

We're at the administrative business and announcements. We had the November 29, 2018 RAB meeting and the draft meeting minutes. Did anyone have any comments on the meeting minutes?

(No response.)

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: And if nobody has any comments, I make a motion to finalize those minutes. Do I have a second? Anyone?

MS. TYGIELSKI: Sure, I'll second.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Okay. Great. So we will finalize those meeting minutes. Thanks, Carolyn.

The other thing that I wanted to talk about on the administrative business is the November 2019 RAB meeting is actually scheduled for Thanksgiving Day. And I don't think any of us want to be doing that on Thanksgiving.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: We never have to date.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Yeah. So there are a couple of dates that we would like to propose to everybody and take a look at their calendars, and we'll shoot out a reminder to try to get a response. But there is the week before, which is November 21st, or the week after, that would push it into December, which would be December 5th.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Yeah, that's what we usually do.

MS. TYGIELSKI: That's what we usually do is early December.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Okay. And is that preference for --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Uh-huh.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Okay. So we'll look at that.

And if anybody has issues with December 5th, let Myrna or myself know, please.

Myrna, did you have any other administrative business?

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Not administrative, no.

VI. FOCUS GROUPS REPORTS

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Okay. Next up we have the focus group reports and discussions.

The first one is Carol for the community.


a) Community Focus Group (Carol Phillips [RAB Community Member])

MS. PHILLIPS: I was just curious. I've heard that there were horse stables out here, and there were three of them, and I know you just took one out a couple months ago. I was just curious if there are any still standing and what is the situation with that, if so?

CO-CHAIR HAYES: I'm not sure about the -- what you're referring to about one that would have been taken out a couple of months ago.

MS. PHILLIPS: Well, there was one, I remember, like a couple months ago you --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Oh, you know what that was? That was a report, probably, on the Western Early Transfer Parcel, the preparation for the Finding of Suitability for Transfer of that. There was --

We must have done -- when was that? About 2008, 2009?

MR. GEMAR: 2010 maybe.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Yeah. Did have to take down the barn --

MR. GEMAR: The barn, right.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: -- due to what's called greensand, spent sandblast grit from the sandblasting operations that had contaminants in them. And was used throughout the barn, and it was just -- I don't know. I don't know why you took the barn down and didn't just dig the dirt out -- maybe you can tell her that.

But there's still stables --

MS. PHILLIPS: Oh, really?

CO-CHAIR HAYES: And those --

It will have to be decided through the process of, you know, that's slated to become part of the park, but it would be part of the process of developing or applying the recommendations or the master plan or whatever to decide whether those were going to continue to be used as a stable.

But then there was another very small stable that was torn down by the Navy in the 1970s, I'm going to say, in the late 1970s, maybe early 1980s, that was just by that turn, that kind of large opening south of the cemetery. That had not been used for housing horses, even from about 1920 and on when cars came along. But the Navy did tear that down, I have no idea why.

And there still are stables, historic livery stables on the XKT's property. You drive by that building anytime you come down as far as Touro University.

MS. PHILLIPS: Oh, that big building on the left?

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Yeah, that beautiful brick with the --

MS. PHILLIPS: Yeah.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: That was a working horse, you know, stable; whereas the one that was built down on the Western Magazine Area was recreation. It was anybody who happened to have a horse who was working for the Navy at the time, you know, or officer.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Board them there.


CO-CHAIR HAYES: They could board them there and do just recreational riding around on the island.

I think that's the three that I can think of.

MS. PHILLIPS: Well, thank you, Myrna.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: And Myrna, is there a natural resources focus group, is that still to be determined?

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Yeah, I suppose so. You know, maybe --

When we developed our Restoration Advisory Board working document that drives how we developed the Restoration Advisory Board, we cheated and used these focus groups, the idea, from another Restoration Advisory Board.

So for a long time, until Jerry Karr died, he was the chair of that committee. And I don't know, nobody's taken up that job. Maybe I'll have to.

But so, there will be nothing to report as far as I know.

b) Technical Focus Group (Paula Tygielski [RAB Community Member])

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Okay. Next is technical, Paula.

MS. TYGIELSKI: I have nothing to report.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Thank you.

City of Vallejo.

c) City of Vallejo Update

CO-CHAIR HAYES: They're not here.

MR. SILER: Just so you know, Ron Gerber retired.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Neal, do you have an update?

d) Lennar Update (Horus Nelson [Lennar Mare Island])

MR. SILER: Yeah, Horus will be giving that.

MR. NELSON: Yes. Okay. I'm Horus Nelson with Lennar Mare Island. I'm going to give an update. I'll talk about some of the topics that Neal Siler discussed in his presentation.

At the last RAB meeting we gave an update on Investigation Area C3. And, as he mentioned, we have completed all the remaining physical fieldwork that needed to take place within that investigation area to achieve closure.

Just to take it back a little bit into 2018. We submitted and received approval on the Final Implementation Report for Investigation Area C3 in August of 2018.

We recorded land use covenants specifically for that investigation area in the following October of 2018.


And then in December of 2018, we recorded the release of the pre-decision covenant, as well as the operation and maintenance agreement for the site going forward.

And what that brings us to, as far as globally speaking with the EETP, we are at 70 percent achieved no further action or closure as a whole for the EETP.

With regards to Investigation Area C1, we have 16 -- Neal mentioned that we have 12 sites that require physical fieldwork efforts to complete.

With Investigation Area C1 we have 16 sites total, most of those include paper trails and reporting and whatnot, to achieve closure.

Within Investigation Area C2 -- and I'll go into a little bit more detail here in a second -- we have 40 sites.

Again, when it comes down to physical fieldwork, we are down to two or three sites in Investigation Area C2. The remainder of that is mostly reporting and paper trails.

So documents that LMI has that have been submitted and received comments from the agencies include the Investigation Area C2 Remedial Action Plan for public review, as well as the Building 84/84A Technical Feasibility and Cost Memorandum for Polychlorinated Biphenyl Remediation at that site.

And, as Neal also mentioned, we plan to give an update from the project manager on that site at the next RAB meeting.

Upcoming documents to be submitted include the Investigation Area C1 Remedial Action Plan for public review.

A Revised Fuel Oil Pipeline Segment H-1/2/Building 85S Implementation Report, as well as a request for closure for that site.

As Neal mentioned, the Fuel Oil Pipeline H1/X/Building 207S Corrective Action Plan Implementation Report. We have completed the physical remediation work and we are going to submit the documentation for that and hope to achieve closure at that site.

Oil Houses 434 and 862 and Cistern 36, we want to submit the Petroleum Corrective Action Plan Implementation Addendum in Investigation Area C2.

As well as the Building 742 PCB Site AL#01 and Subsurface Pits Land Use Covenant for that site.

The other document we want to submit is the Revised Investigation Area D1.2 Commercial Area Land Use Covenant and Rescission of Existing Land Use Covenant to have that taken off the site.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: I have that circled. What does that mean?

MR. NELSON: What does what mean?

CO-CHAIR HAYES: The rescission of the existing LUC.

MR. NELSON: Okay.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: And revising of the commercial area land use covenant.

MR. NELSON: Neal can expand on that.


MR. SILER: So when we transferred Alden Park and Chapel Park to the city, we never carved anything out from the Land Use Covenant. What we have to do is actually do a new legal description for what Lennar Mare Island owns, and a new legal description for what the city owns, and then separate that one land use covenant into two land use covenants at that time.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Uh-huh.

MR. NELSON: Okay. We've got numerous documents that we've submitted since the last RAB update that we're waiting to receive comments or reviews from those.

And those include the Revised First Five-Year Review Report for Installation Restoration Site 15 in Investigation Area C1.

Also the Building 85/87/271 Soil Vapor Assessment Report that includes a human health risk assessment.

We have the Revised Building 386 Tank and Pipelines Soil Removal Completion Report that involves about six fuel oil pipelines that are associated in and around Building 386. We have conducted numerous excavations associated with those pipelines and documented those in the report and submitted that to the agencies.

Oil Houses 434 and 862 and Cistern 36 Petroleum Corrective Action Plan Addendum documenting the excavations that we did to remove soils that were impacted with petroleum hydrocarbons, as well as an excavation status summary and a path forward for that site as well.

We have the Revised Corrective Action Implementation Report associated with Building 386 Underground Storage Tank and Oil Pipelines at the site.

We have Building 742 PCB Site UL#02, Site Characterization and Cleanup Action Summary report documenting the cleanup of the eastern and western elevators and associated machinery in that building.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: So will that be an example of where you've done that cleanup work so you won't have a land use covenant on that because of the PCBs in the elevators?

MR. SILER: No, we will have a land use covenant. The elevator itself, the car, the shaft, and the base of the shaft, those have all been cleaned up to unrestricted land use.

The problem is the equipment on top that actually runs the elevator, the car as it runs through, that still has polychlorinated biphenyls above the cleanup goal of 0.74 milligrams per kilogram. But it fits in the area where we can get a low occupancy land use covenant on that area. Just like we have done for a couple of other sites on the island, Building 229 AL#01 and Building 521 AL#01, where they have those. Because realistically, hopefully nobody is going to be living up in the elevator equipment room at some point.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Uh-huh. Have we ever had explained to us, even though someone's not going to be living there, why you would take on the cost of continuing to monitor through a land use covenant rather than just finishing cleaning it up? Is it technically impossible or infeasible or is it too expensive or --

MR. SILER: It's really infeasibility. I can scabble the concrete, but the problem is that I have so much weight on there with the equipment, I'm afraid if I do that I will have the ceiling fall in on the elevator shaft, and I don't want to do that.



MR. NELSON: Okay. In addition, we will be submitting the Implementation Report and Request for Closure for Underground Storage Tank M57 and associated fuel oil pipelines in the area.

We submitted 12 total land use covenants associated with buildings within Investigation Area C2. I won't read each and every one of these --

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Oh, good.

MR. NELSON: -- off the list -- I want to keep everybody awake here. But that's a significant movement forward in achieving closure within those areas.

We have the Revised Initial Study for the Investigation Area C2 Remedial Action Plan.

We have the Draft Technical Memorandum: Remediation of PCB-Impacted Concrete at Building 237. We had remaining PCBs within the concrete floor of the building, so we scarified and scabbled areas associated with that, documented all that, and submitted the results of that work.

There's the Revised Investigation Area D1.3-Central Beneficial Use Exemption Request for Concurrence at that site.

We have the post fifth injection event and the Second 2018 Semiannual Groundwater Monitoring Results for Investigation Area C1. We just conducted groundwater monitoring sampling and analysis for the wells associated with that site.

There's also the Second 2018 Semiannual Groundwater Monitoring Results Report associated with Installation Restoration Site 3, Industrial Wastewater Pump Station 4, and Oil/Water Separator T-2. Again, we conducted the semiannual groundwater monitoring at that site and documented the results of that completion.

MR. SILER: So the sum total of this, as you can see, is that we're busy.

MR. NELSON: Yeah.

MR. SILER: And we have pedal to the metal and we're trying to get everything done.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Yeah, impressive.

MR. NELSON: It's hard to believe January is already over.

Some of the fieldwork that has been performed on our site since the last update includes work in Buildings 87, 89, and 91.

We've got further characterization or investigation and remediation of the PCB site within Building 87 within the concrete floor. We've got a further investigation to bound the presence of PCBs within the floors in that area.

In Building 91, it's kind of a two-fold site, Neal talked about this just a few minutes ago. We have PCBs within the concrete floor on the southern side of the building. And if you take a look at the photo on the top right of the update, it shows a view to the east within Building 91. And on the right-hand side of the building is a concrete floor. And essentially the two-thirds left-hand side of the photo you can see it is primarily wooden floor and joists below.


And the work associated with the PCB cleanup is primarily associated with the concrete floor on the right.

And if you look kind of in the background, you can see the reflection of the sunlight coming through, the gloss kind of disappears in the background; those are the areas where we're scarifying and scabbling the surface to remove PCBs. And that's currently going on as we speak.

And as we mentioned, there's elemental mercury present in areas underneath the wooden floor, so we are removing that, investigating, collecting samples, and we plan to remove soils underneath the floor in there.

And as Neal will attest, it's quite an interesting building with a very undulatory surface underneath the floor. And we've got interesting concrete baffles and things throughout that make it a little bit of a challenge to kind of work around. But we are taking it step-by-step, proceeding carefully so that the contractors are, you know, working in the safest conditions possible and not making any releases to the environment. So that's going on as we speak.

Moving forward. Upcoming fieldwork. We're going to continue with the PCB and elemental mercury issues that exist in Buildings 87 and 91.

Starting next week, we are going to be kicking off work at the Domestic Pump Station 6. We are going to kick off the Corrective Action Plan Implementation at the site. We are going to be conducting some injections in the groundwater wells to hopefully remove some of the free product hydrocarbons there.

And the associated cooling water loop that runs underneath the DOM-6 site, that connects the Mare Island Strait with Building 121, as you may or may not know, is the former Mare Island power plant; they would convey strait water to run through and cool the power generating equipment. We are going to be doing some desedimentation, jetting, and removal of impacted soils that have managed to work their way into that intake arm.

We've also got the remediation at Building 116 PCB Site UL#01. We presented on that at the last RAB meeting, so we're going to be kicking that off here soon.

And as Neal mentioned, at the Building 206/208 site on the western side of 1310 where Film Mare Island is located, we are going to be conducting a large excavation to remove soils impacted in that area.

And that's it for Lennar Mare Island's update.


Next we have Dwight with Weston.

e) Weston Update (Dwight Gemar [Weston Solutions])

MR. GEMAR: Well, I'm trying to accept Elizabeth's challenge to get my update the size of a postcard. I think I have achieved that.

MS. WELLS: I think so. No, a Post-it note.

MR. GEMAR: Well, I know -- no, a postcard. But I don't know how to print to a postcard at the office, so I just had to use the regular one.


There's only one outstanding document left under the Western Early Transfer Parcel environmental services property agreement, and that's the Final Land Use Control Remedial Design report for three sites: Installation Restoration Site 05, which is at the bottom left corner of the background photograph; the Western Magazine Area, which is the parallel row of buildings out there on the west shoreline; and Dredge Pond 7 South, which is in the bottom left corner in the photograph.

So that should hopefully get review and concurrence by the regulators soon. And that would be the last non-recurring document. There are annual reports and such that will continue.

For maintenance activities, we still maintain the walking trail that is out on the west levee.

And we obviously maintain the leachate groundwater collection system that encircles the former IA H1 landfill. We have our first groundwater monitoring event for this year coming up in March.

That's it.


And the regulatory agency update, Gavin and Elizabeth.

f) Regulatory Agency Update (Gavin McCreary [Department of Toxic Substances Control] and Elizabeth Wells [Regional Water Board])

MR. MCCREARY: At the last RAB meeting the Community Co-Chair requested that I report a little bit on some of the documents we are looking at. So I will do that right now.

It's been mentioned twice already, and of course Nick went into pretty good detail about the Finding of Suitability to Transfer for the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office. That is going fine. We should have comments on that document in about a week or so.

We are also reviewing the Draft Feasibility Study Data Collection Work Plan for Installation Restoration Site 04. The Remedial Investigation Report is approaching completion, but we determined that we need to do a little more characterization of volatile organic compounds and the hydrology within the site. So far in the work plan, there are no real issues. We are just doing a little bit of fine-tuning.

We are also looking at the Draft Feasibility Study Data Collection Work Plan for the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office South, not to be confused with the other Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office Proper. Over the course of the remedial investigation, we determined that there was some more data needed. The objectives of the work plan are to collect discrete soil and groundwater data to support the feasibility study evaluation of remedial alternatives, evaluate area-wide groundwater conditions in wet and dry seasons, collect additional surface soil data within the potential habitat of the salt marsh harvest mouse, and to evaluate the exposure of the salt marsh harvest mouse to concentrations of metals.

We are also anticipating the Draft Feasibility Study Data Collection Work Plan for the Crane Test Area North. Again, we just determined a little more data is needed. The objective of that work plan will be to delineate the extent of hydrocarbon and metals contamination in soil and groundwater; and, again, the exposure of the Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse to metals at the surface.


And we're also anticipating the Draft Year One Soil Gas Monitoring Report for the Installation Restoration Site 17 and Building 503 Area. One of the remedies for Subarea 2 of that site includes monitoring for natural attenuation to demonstrate that the removal of the trichloroethene source has reduced soil gas concentrations to less than the remediation goal. And we should begin reviewing that report very soon.

Within the DTSC, we had a draft of the California Environmental Quality Act Initial Study for Investigation Area F1. This document is used to determine the impacts of the project on the environment. We look at a number of things that have actually been discussed tonight a little bit. I think the subject of traffic was brought up, historic resources were brought up, we talked a little bit about natural resources, and then protecting endangered species. And this document helps ensure that by performing these projects we are not causing any other damage.

So the DTSC determined that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment, and a negative declaration has been prepared. We will soon be publishing a public notice in the local Vallejo newspaper. And at that point, there will be a 30-day public comment period for you to take a look at it and voice any concerns that you might have over it.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: And will you please, through the Navy's support staff, also send us copies of that notice directly?

MR. MCCREARY: Yeah. Absolutely. We will have copies for you or we will provide the locations where you can access them.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Thanks, Gavin.

MS. WELLS: I don't think I can follow that with nearly as much.

But, what I did do was complete review of the Building 742, Former Degreasing Plant Technical Memorandum that was about the human health risk assessment.

And then I finished looking at a well destruction technical memorandum for the very last site in Investigation Area C3, Building 144 Oil/Water Separator. So, the wells are going to be destroyed and done. Whoo! Yay!

And then also I looked at the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office Finding of Suitability to Transfer, which has been discussed quite a bit tonight.

Currently, I'm reviewing some of the same documents that Gavin is looking at, like the Installation Restoration Site 4 Feasibility Study Data Collection Work Plan, the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office South Feasibility Study Data Collection Work Plan, and the Western Magazine Area/Installation Restoration Site 5/Dredge Pond 7S Land Use Control Remedial Design revisions. I think I got all that right.

And then, finally, I brought with me Sarabeth George. She is brand new staff in our Groundwater Protection division and I just wanted to introduce her to the Restoration Advisory Board process.


Next up, we have the co-chair report. Myrna.


VII. CO-CHAIRS’ REPORT (Myrna Hayes [Community Co-Chair] and Scott Anderson [Navy Co-Chair])

CO-CHAIR HAYES: You go first.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: The one thing that I had or that I forgot to talk about earlier was the--

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Oh, wait. You have to do this.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Oh, I do?

CO-CHAIR HAYES: He's doing pretty well for the first time, huh?

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: I didn't know I had to do this.

So one of your handouts is the monthly progress report.

We didn't perform any fieldwork in January.

And we didn't submit any documents during this reporting period. But that does not mean we were not doing anything.

Document submittals and progress of regulatory review. We received concurrence from DTSC and the Regional Water Board on our Final Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum for Building 742, Former Degreasing Plant, which Elizabeth just mentioned. And so we are going to be removing the groundwater monitoring wells and such from that site here shortly, within the next couple of months.

And comments were received from DTSC and the Regional Water Board on the Draft Final Investigation Area F1 Record of Decision/Remedial Action Plan.

Year to date for documents and comments submitted. The number of documents that were submitted by the Navy, zero.

We've gotten comments on from DTSC on one document, and also from the Regional Water Board on one document. There have not been a lot of documents that have gone out since the last RAB meeting as far as from the Navy.

Any questions on any of that?

I apologize, I wasn't very prepared.

So did you have anything?

CO-CHAIR HAYES: So no, you have --

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: So the one thing I did mention before is the RAB tour, and I wanted to talk to you a little bit about possible timing of that.

I think in the past, September has been the month where we have had that, is that --

MS. HUNTER: Or August.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Or September or December.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Yes.

MR. SILER: We used to do it in December.


CO-CHAIR HAYES: We used to do it twice a year.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: So, you know, I would propose August or September. We have some time to think about that, so we can maybe talk about it again at the next RAB meeting.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Well, it usually takes the place of the RAB meeting; doesn't it? So I would recommend doing it whenever that RAB meeting is, whether it's August or September, I don't know.

MS. HUNTER: September.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: September?

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Or -- yeah.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: And is there a preference for it being on a Saturday or a weekday?

MS. HUNTER: We have done both.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: We have been doing weekday.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Okay.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Thursday.

MR. SILER: On Thursday usually.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Oh Thursday?

MR. SILER: Yeah.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Yes.

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Okay. So I'll get with Carolyn and we'll work on -- well, maybe even that RAB Thursday in September, and we'll propose that to everybody.

That's all I've got.

Myrna?

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Okay. Really what I have is what I've already mentioned to you that the San Francisco Bay Flyway Festival -- not Flyfest, that's in the Central Valley in the summertime by the feedlots; not the Flyaway Festival, I think that was a Southwest Airlines or a PSA ad, fly away with us -- but the San Francisco Bay Flyway Festival will take place February 8, 9, and 10.

I want to give a shout-out to Lennar Mare Island who has been going above and beyond what you can imagine to pull together a building for us and also a supplemental tent, which we will be using for some of our slide shows and our live bird, live bat presentations. So thank you very, very much to that team.

And then the Navy and the City of Vallejo for working out a sublicense, a license and a sublicense so that we can gain access, now only six times a year, six days a year, hour and a half each, to the Historic South Shore for public access.

You don't love who you don't know. That's what a psychology teacher I had used to tell us in college. That is the only way you are going to fall in love with someone is if you actually meet them.


And so we believe that part of the Navy's responsibility and its sublicensee, the City of Vallejo -- or licensee -- part of your responsibility regarding environmental cleanup is to provide for public access to properties that are intended for transfer for public access.

I mean there is a lot of investment, a tremendous amount of investment that the Navy has made in ensuring the Western Early Transfer Parcel, the Eastern Early Transfer Parcel, that -- you funded it, and we go around on site visits, and we could drive around to those sites.

There is only one property right now on Mare Island that the public cannot have regular access to. We used to do it once a month. For about 20 years we used to guide hikes there, and we used to go onto the housing property, which you are slating for a FOST, so clearly there is no, you know, serious danger for being on the property.

And what it does is, again, it demonstrates to people that environmental cleanup makes reuse possible. And by locking us out, except for six days a year, and the houses completely, you -- you know, disenchanting the public with your -- with our efforts to do environmental cleanup. So it's very disappointing and disheartening to me.

So by saying all of that, I also do want to thank the Navy and the City of Vallejo for arranging for this limited access during the Flyway Festival.

And to the City of Vallejo for providing the exorbitant additional insurance requirements the Navy has, that we can't even purchase as a non-profit. We have plenty of insurance, but we can't even go out and buy as much as the Navy wants. So it's a team effort. And one day it will all be free for us to roam and appreciate.

But for now, take advantage of a trip on Friday the 8th, 10:00 to 11:30, guided by our volunteer staff and escorted by the Navy; and Saturday, February 9, 10:00 to 11:30.

And if I get out of here, I'll go finish the schedule this evening for the event. And that would be www.sfbayflywayfestival.com would be the website.

So, thank you. And sorry, I guess we are about out of time because Nitro just got up and is leaving the site. So, thank you, everyone.

VIII. SECOND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Just real quick before we adjourn.

Is there any other public comment?

(No response.)

CO-CHAIR ANDERSON: Great. Thank you. I appreciate it. It was my first RAB here at Mare Island, so thank you all. And if not before, we will see you in a couple of months.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: Well, add Liz King to the attendee list tonight from Vallejo.

MS. KING: Sorry I was late.

CO-CHAIR HAYES: That's all right.


(Thereupon the proceedings ended at 9:05 p.m.)


List of Handouts:

• Presentation Handout – Overview of the Navy's Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST) Process and Transfer of Parcel XVII – Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office Proper (FOST 17) [Attachment 1]

• Presentation Handout – Eastern Early Transfer Parcel Update and Path Forward for 2019 [Attachment 2]

• Navy Monthly Progress Report, January 31, 2019 [Attachment 3]

• Lennar Mare Island RAB Update, January 2019 [Attachment 4]

• Weston Mare Island RAB Update, January 2019 [Attachment 5]

Attachment 1. Presentation Handout – Overview of the Navy's Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST) Process and Transfer of Parcel XVII – Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office Proper (FOST 17)

Overview of the Navy's Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST) Process and Transfer of Parcel XVII -Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office Proper (FOST 17)

Former Mare Island Naval ShipyardVallejo, California

Scott Anderson, BRAC Environmental CoordinatorRestoration Advisory Board Meeting 01/31/2019

2 BRAC Program Management Office

Purpose of the Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST) Document

01/31/2019

• Develop a DOD-wide process to assess, determine and document the environmental suitability of properties for transfer by deed.

• Ensure protection of human health and the environment.

• Ensure compliance with applicable environmental cleanup requirements and demonstrate compliance with Section 120(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).


Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST) Outline

01/31/2019

• The FOST is an internal DOD document that summarizes matters specifically related to hazardous substances, petroleum products, and other regulated materials (e.g. asbestos, lead based paint, and pesticides).

• Document is signed by the Navy, and agreements are in place for federal and/or state agency review/comment and concurrence.

• Any unresolved agency comments are included in the FOST as an appendix.

• Attached to the Deed and provides required notifications and identifies land use control requirements if needed.

4 BRAC Program Management Office 01/31/2019

Potentially Applicable Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST) Topics at MINS

• Presence of Hazardous Substances (Notification)

• CERCLA/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (Response/Corrective Actions)

• Presence of Petroleum Products (Notification)

• Underground Storage Tanks/Aboveground Storage Tanks (Closure/Removal)

• Munitions and Explosives of Concern (Response Actions)

• Asbestos Containing Material (Abatement/Notification)

• Lead-Based Paint, Target Housing and Residential Property (Abatement/Notification)

• Polychlorinated Biphenyls (Notification)

• Pesticides (Notification)


Navy’s Proposed Transfers for Fiscal Year 2019

• Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) FOST (Nick Shih to present this specific area and FOST)

• Historic Housing Area FOST

• Installation Restoration Site 05/Dredge Pond 7S/Western Magazine Area (WMA) FOST

• Transfer Parcel XV-B(1) – Department of Toxic Substances Control and Regional Water Board FOST Concurrence Received October through December 2018


NSY Mare IslandRemaining Disposal Parcels

Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) Finding of Suitability to Transfer

Former Mare Island Naval ShipyardVallejo, California

Nicholas T. Shih, Project ManagerRestoration Advisory Board Meeting 01/31/2019


Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) –Presentation Topics

• Site location and description

• What is the DRMO?

• Historical removal actions

• Milestone documents


Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) –Site Location and Description

• Southwest corner of Azuar Drive and A Street

• Approximately 8.5 acres

• Commercial/industrial property

• DRMO – Disposal of Defense property and reutilization of excess property


Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) at MINS

• DRMO started as a scrapyard in the early 1940s for surplus shipyard materials and scrap metal.

• Site used until mid-1995 and involved storage of electrical transformers, lead batteries, metal scrap, paper bailing, and handling of petroleum oils.

• Munitions and explosives of concern and low-level radiological items have been discovered in the scrapyard as a result of incidental turn-in along with scrap. Common examples:

– Small radioluminescent (glow-in-the-dark) dials and deck markers

– Mostly inert cartridge casings, but some live ammunition






Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) –Site History

• Initial Assessment Study – 1983

• Radiological Removal Action – 1996

• Non-Time-Critical Removal Action – 2005 to 2008

• Petroleum Corrective Action – 2009 to 2010

• Proposed Plan – 2014

• Record of Decision – 2016

• Finding of Suitability to Transfer - 2019


Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) –Radiological Removal Action

• 1995: Navy conducted General Radioactive Material Program (G-RAM) surveys of MINS sites prior to base closure.

• Based on multiple contaminants, Navy proposed to temporarily cap the DRMO scrapyard area and conduct a comprehensive removal action after base closure (April 1996).

• After State and community input to prioritize response to radiological issues, State and Navy came to an agreement to proceed with surveys and removal of radiological sources and radiologically impacted soil instead of a temporary cap.

• Surveys, removal, and confirmation work completed in 1996 and no further action concurrence was received in 1997 on the radiological release report.


Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) –Non-Time Critical Removal Action

01/31/2019

• Conducted from 2005 to 2007 to remove chemical contaminants (metals, polychlorinated biphenyls, pesticides, and semi-volatile organic compounds) and munitions and explosives of concern (MEC).

• Initial scope: excavate soil to 18 inches below ground surface across the entire former scrapyard area.

• Excavation expanded to areas outside of the former scrapyard area and deeper (up to 8.5 feet below ground surface).

• Total volume of excavated soil was approximately 21,700 cubic yards.

• Total of 11 MEC items were recovered in the scrapyard area.


Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) –Non-Time Critical Removal Action


• Conducted from August 2009 to March 2010 and focused on removal of petroleum-impacted soil.

• Approximately 7.2 acre area was excavated that included portions of DRMO and areas outside of DRMO.

• The maximum excavation depth of reached 21 feet below ground surface on the eastern portion of the site.

• Total volume of excavated soil was approximately 160,000 cubic yards.

Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) –Petroleum Corrective Action


Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) –Petroleum Corrective Action


Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) –Record of Decision

• In a July 2014 public meeting, the Navy presented Proposed Plan / Draft Remedial Action Plan for DRMO.

• Proposed remedy: Institutional controls to prevent domestic use of shallow groundwater.

• Public questioned the need for institutional controls for groundwater.

• Navy and State revisited the site-specific groundwater data and conditions and agreed that institutional controls were not necessary.

• No Further Action Record of Decision in September 2016.


Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) –Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST)

01/31/2019

• Draft FOST was issued in November 2018.

• Final FOST is anticipated in spring 2019.

• Property transfer to City of Vallejo in summer 2019.


Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO)

QUESTIONS

Attachment 2. Presentation Handout – Eastern Early Transfer Parcel Update and Path Forward for 2019

Eastern Early Transfer Parcel (EETP) Update and Path

Forward for 2019

Eastern Early Transfer Parcel (EETP) Update and Path

Forward for 2019

Presented to Mare Island Restoration Advisory Board

January 31, 2019

Agenda

• Summarize Major Submittals / Activities Initiated / Performed / Completed in 2018

• Summarize Planned Major Submittals / Activities for 2019

• Questions

2

EETP Investigation Areas Status

3

EETP Sites Requiring Physical Work

4

IA C1• Major Accomplishments in 2018

Building 91 Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Site UL#01 and Mercury – Regulatory Agency Concurrence on Removal Action Work Plans and Remediation

Fuel-Oil Pipeline (FOPL) Segment H1/X/B207S Remediation

Installation Restoration Program Site 15 (IR15)Fifth Enhanced Reductive Dechlorination (ERD) Injection Event

Domestic Pump Station No. 6 (DOM-6) Regulatory Agency Concurrence on Remedial Design Work Plan

Cooling Water Loop – Intake Arm (CWL-IA) Regulatory Agency Concurrence on Remedial Design Work Plan

• Major Activities Planned for 2019 Submission, Approval and Implementation of Pilot Study

Work Plan Addendum at IWPS4/OWS T-2 and IR03 Sites

Compliance Monitoring at IR15 Completion of Remediation at Buildings 87 and 91, DOM-6

and CWL-IA Submission and Regulatory Agency Concurrence of IA C1

Remedial Action Plan (RAP)

Buildings 87 and 91

FO

PL H

1/X/B

207S

DOM-6CWL-IA

IR15

IWPS 4OWS T-2

IR03


Building 688 PCB Site UL#01 - Completed Remedial Actions

Building 742 PCB Site UL#02 - Completed Remedial Actions

Buildings 746 / 746A PCB Sites UL#01 – Completed Remedial Actions and Received Regulatory Agency Concurrence

Building 116 PCB Site UL#01 – Prepared, Submitted and Implemented Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) Site

Cistern 36 - Performed Additional Remedial Activities Sanitary Sewer Sites in IAs C1 and C2 - Finalized and

Received Regulatory Agency Concurrence on Data Gap

Submitted IA C2 RAP

• Major Activities Planned for 2019 Building 116 PCB Site UL#01 – Complete Remedial Actions Building 206/208 Area – Complete Remedial Actions Oil Houses 434 and 862 and Cistern 36 Site – Receive

Regulatory Agency Concurrence on Implementation Report IA C2 RAP - Complete and Receive Regulatory Concurrence

Building 688

Building 742

Building 116

Building206/208 Area

Cistern 36


Building 144 Oil/Water Separator (OWS) –Regulatory Agency Concurrence that Remedial Actions Completed

Building 730 PCB Site AL#01 – Executed and Recorded LUC. Received Regulatory Agency Concurrence on Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan

IA C3 Triangle – Executed and Recorded LUC. Received Regulatory Agency Concurrence on O&M Plan

IA C3-Wide LUC – Executed and Recorded LUC IA C3 Pre-Decision Covenant Release – Executed

and Recorded IA C3 Implementation Report – Finalized and

Received Regulatory Agency Concurrence Received Regulatory Agency Closure Certification

• Major Activities Planned for 2019 Submit Documentation for and Receive Navy

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Warranty

IA C3 Triangle

Building 730

Building 144

IA D1.3

• Major Accomplishments in 2018 IA D1.3-Central (Buildings 84/84A) – Performed

Additional PCB Sampling. Submitted Draft Technical Feasibility Study and Cost Memorandum for Remediation to DTSC and USEPA.

IA D.1-South – Recorded Release of Pre-Decision Covenant

• Major Activities Planned for 2019 IA D1.3-North and IA D1.3-South – Receive DTSC

Certification Letter Confirming Completion of Remedial Actions for IA D1.3-North and IA D1.3-South

IA D1.3-South – Submit Request for CERCLA Warranty

IA D1.3-Central – Gain Regulatory Agency Approval for, and Implement, Appropriate Remedial Actions

IA D1.3-South

IA D1.3-Central

IA D1.3-North

Environmental Cleanup Program Summary

• Eastern Early Transfer Parcel Acreage With Remedial Actions Completed (Pre-Decision Covenant Release A Total of 465 of the 663 Acres (70%) Certified for Remedial Actions

Completed (Regulatory Closure Achieved)

• Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program Closed 1 Site in 2018 Currently, 110 of 113 Sites (97%) Have Received Closure Final 3 Sites Being Addressed in 2019

• Fuel-Oil Pipeline (FOPL) Program Closed 0 Segments in 2018 Currently, 115 of 116 Segments (99%) Have Received Closure Final Segment Being Addressed in 2019

• PCB Program Closed 7 Sites in 2018 Currently, 565 of 570 Sites (99%) Have Received Closure Final 5 Sites Being Addressed in 2019

Plans for 2019 and 2020

• 2019 Complete Field Work at 12 Remaining Sites Prepare and Submit Site-Specific Implementation Reports and Requests for Closure for

Regulatory Agency Review Prepare and Submit Site-Specific and IA-Wide LUCs for Regulatory Agency Review Prepare and Submit Site-Specific O&M Plans for Engineering Control Sites with LUCs for

Regulatory Agency Review Prepare and Submit IA C1 RAP for Regulatory Agency Review Finalize and Present IA C2 RAP for Public Review Initiate Compliance Groundwater Monitoring – IWPS4 / OWS T-2 / IR03 and IR15

• 2020 Complete Compliance Groundwater Monitoring – IWPS4 / OWS T-2 / IR03 and IR15 Finalize and Present IA C1 RAP for Public Review Finalize, Execute, Record and Implement Site-Specific and IA-Wide LUCs Finalize IA-Wide Implementation Reports – IAs C1, C2 and D1.3-Central Finalize, Execute and Record IA-Wide Pre-Decision Covenant Releases Request CERCLA Warranties for Remaining IAs from Navy

Questions?Questions?

Acronyms and Abbreviations

• AL – Assessment Location• CERCLA – Comprehensive Environmental Response

Compensation and Liability Act • CWL-IA – Cooling Water Loop-Intake Arm• DOM – Domestic Pump Station• DTSC – California Department of Toxic Substances Control• ERD – Enhanced Reductive Dechlorination• FOPL - Fuel-oil Pipeline• IA - Investigation Area • IR – Installation Restoration Program Site• IWPS – Industrial Wastewater Pump Station• NFA – No Further Action• O&M – Operations and Maintenance• OWS – Oil / Water Separator• PCB – Polychlorinated Biphenyl• RAP – Remedial Action Plan• SAP – Sampling and Analysis Plan• UL – Unknown Location• USEPA – United States Environmental Protection Agency• UST – Underground Storage Tank

12

Attachment 3. Navy Monthly Progress Report, January 31, 2019

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Department of the Navy (Navy) prepared this monthly progress report (MPR) to discuss environmental cleanup at the former Mare Island Naval Shipyard (MINS) in Vallejo, California. This MPR does not discuss cleanup work by the City of Vallejo, its agent, Weston Solutions or its developer, Lennar Mare Island, through the Environmental Services Cooperative Agreements (ESCAs). The work completed through those agreements this month is reported separately. This MPR discusses progress made during the reporting period from December 28, 2018 through January 31, 2019. The information provided in this report includes updates to field work and removal actions, document submittals, the progress of regulatory reviews, issues associated with Navy environmental programs, and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Cleanup Team (BCT) and Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) meetings.

2.0 FIELD WORK, ACTIONS, AND UPCOMING EVENTS

During the month of January 2019, the Navy did not perform any field work.

3.0 DOCUMENT SUBMITTALS AND PROGRESS OF REGULATORY REVIEW

The Navy did not submit any documents during the reporting period.

USS Chicago (CL-29), Mare Island, 1930

www.bracpmo.navy.mil

Navy Monthly Progress Report

Former Mare Island Naval Shipyard

January 31, 2019

3.0 DOCUMENT SUBMITTALS AND PROGRESS OF REGULATORY REVIEW (Continued)

The Navy received comments or concurrence from the regulatory agencies on the following documents during the reporting period:

Concurrence received from the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board) on the Final Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum for Building 742, Former Degreasing Plant

Comments received from DTSC and Regional Water Board on the Draft Final Investigation Area F1 Record of Decision/Remedial Action Plan

4.0 REGULATORY REVIEW: YEAR-TO-DATE PROGRESS

The documents presented in the following table include only documents that address sites where the Navy remains responsible for the cleanup work.

Number of Documents Submitted by the Navy

0

Number of DTSC Comments Received by the Navy

1

Number of Regional Water Board Comments Received by the Navy

1

Number of EPA Comments Received by the Navy

0

Monthly Progress Report – Former Mare Island Naval Shipyard January 31, 2019

BCT meetings are held regularly with the Navy, DTSC, and the Regional Water Board to discuss the

progress of environmental cleanup at MINS. The next BCT meeting will be held on

March 28, 2019.

RAB MEETING SCHEDULE

The RAB meets the last Thursday of every other month, unless otherwise noted in bold. The next RAB meetings are scheduled for:

• March 28, 2019

• May 30, 2019

• July 25, 2019

Meetings begin at 7:00 p.m. and are held at: Mare Island Conference Center 375 G Street, Vallejo, CA 94592

NAVY CONTACT INFORMATION Scott Anderson

BRAC Environmental Coordinator E-mail: [email protected] Local Telephone: (707) 562-3104

San Diego Telephone: (619) 524-5808 San Diego Fax: (619) 524-0575



Attachment 4. Lennar Mare Island RAB Update, January 2019

"S"S"S

"S

!

!

!

!

!!!

!

!

!!!!

AZUAR DR

WALNUT AVE

CALIFORNIA AVE

DUMP RD

MESA RD

C ST

RAILROAD AVE

I ST

CLUB

DR

J ST

7TH ST

A ST

L ST

MARE ISLAND CAUSEWAY

ACCESS RD

D ST

M ST

SARGO WAY

B ST

4TH ST3RD ST

K ST

P ST

E ST

N ST

ACAC

IAL ST

1ST ST

Q ST

15TH ST

9TH ST

MADRONE AVE

10TH ST

OAK AVE

DENT RD

WAHOO AVE

LAWS AVEPRESTON ST

17TH AVE

FIREDELL AVE

CRISP AVE

WAWSMUTH AVE

KLEIN AVE

18TH ST

IHONSON LN

RAILROAD AVE

OAK AVE

C ST

WATERFRONT AVE

W 13TH ST

12TH ST

14TH ST

14TH ST

MOISES WY

TISDALE AVE

5TH ST

5TH ST

E ST

SUISUN AVE

WISEMAN AVE

DETORO WAY

9TH ST

9TH ST

13TH ST

GROVE ST

POMPANO AVE

8TH ST

8TH ST

10TH ST

POPLAR AVE

WEST ELM ST

SAN PABLO

2ND ST

KIRKLAND AVE

REEVES AVE

SAN PABLO AVE

PETALUMA AVE

CURRY ST

SARGO AVE

MAGN

OLIA

ST

H ST

HENLEY AVE

KLEIN AVE

ACCESS RD

BUILDINGS 85/89/271

IWPS 4

IR03

IR15

OWS T-2

BUILDING 121

D1.3

IR13IR10

H1/X/B207S

IA C3 BGM TRIANGLE

BUILDING 742 UL#02

BUILDING 46

BUILDING 144 OIL WATER SEPARATOR (BUILDING 144 OWS)

UST M57

BUILDING 84

BUILDING 746A UL#01

BUILDING 91 UL#01BUILDING 87 UL#01

BUILDING 116 UL#01

BUILDINGS 206/208 AREA

DOM 6/CWL-IA

H1/2/B85S

BUILDING 386

BUILDING 237

ARMY

SCHOOL

A3

B.1

D1.2

D1.1

D1.2

D1.3

D1.1

C1

D2

H2

D1.3

D1.1

B.2-1

B.2-2

C2

C3OIL HOUSE 862

BUILDING 730 AL#01

BUILDING 688 UL#01

CISTERN 36

OIL HOUSE 434

FEATURES WITHIN THE EETPJANUARY 2019 RAB UPDATELENNAR MARE ISLAND, VALLEJO, CALIFORNIA

0 500 1,000 1,500Feet

³

BUILDING 746 UL#01

LEGEND! PCB SITE!! FORMER IWL FEATURES"S FORMER UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK

FUEL-OIL PIPELINEINVESTIGATION AREA

FOUR KEY STAGES OF CLEANUP

STRUCTURESROADS

SURVEY & SAMPLINGREMEDIAL INVESTIGATION / FEASIBILITY STUDY

PENDING CLOSURE / CLOSEDREMEDIAL ACTION / CLEANUP

WETLANDS

GROUP I SITESEETP

Building 91 Following Completion of Phase I Remediation of PCBs and Mercury, Investigation Area C1

Agency Reviewed / Commented or Concurred Documents:IA C2 Remedial Action Plan for Public Review (Comments)Building 84/84A Technical Feasibility and Cost Memorandum for Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Remediation, IA D1.3-Central (Comments)

Upcoming Documents:IA C1 Remedial Action Plan for Public ReviewRevised FOPL Segment H1/2/B85S Implementation Report and Request for Closure, IA C1Fuel-oil Pipeline H1/X/B207S Corrective Action Plan Implementation Report, IA C1Oil Houses 434 and 862 and Cistern 36 Petroleum Corrective Action Plan Implementation Report Addendum, IA C2Building 742 PCB Site AL#01 and Subsurface Pits Land Use Covenant, IA C2Revised IA D1.2 Commercial Area LUC / Rescission of Existing LUC, IA D1.2

Documents Submitted and/or in Review/Modification:Revised First Five-Year Review Report for IR15, IA C1Building 85/87/271 Soil Vapor Assessment Report with Human Health Risk Assessment, IA C1Revised Building 386 Tank and Pipelines E2/1.5/B386A, E2/1.5/B386B, E2/3/B386A, E2/3/B386B, E2/3/B386C and E2/3/B386D Soil Removal Completion Report, IA C2Oil Houses 434 and 862 and Cistern 36 Petroleum Corrective Action Plan Addendum, IA C2Oil Houses 434 and 862 and Cistern 36 Excavation Status Summary and Path Forward, IA C2Revised Corrective Action Implementation Report - Building 386 Underground Storage Tank and Oil Pipelines, IA C2Building 742 PCB Site UL#02, Site Characterization and Cleanup Action Summary Report, IA C2Implementation Report and Request for Closure for Underground Storage Tank M57 and Fuel-oil Pipeline E3/VAR/M57 and Other Building 866 Area Petroleum Hydrocarbon Environmental Sites, IA C2Draft Building 46 PCB Site AL#03 Land Use Covenant, IA C2Draft Building 134 PCB Sites AL#01, AL#02 and AL#03 Land Use Covenant, IA C2Draft Building 382 PCB Site AL#01 Land Use Covenant, IA C2Draft Building 386 PCB Site AL#01 Land Use Covenant, IA C2Draft Building 676 PCB Sites AL#02 and AL#04 Land Use Covenant, IA C2Draft Building 678 PCB Site AL#01 Land Use Covenant, IA C2Draft Building 678 PCB Site AL#02 Land Use Covenant, IA C2Draft Building 680 PCB Site AL#01 Land Use Covenant, IA C2Draft Building 692 Interior Land Use Covenant, IA C2Draft Building 702 PCB Site AL#01 Land Use Covenant, IA C2Draft Building 738 PCB Site AL#01 Land Use Covenant, IA C2Draft Building 977 PCB Site AL#02 Land Use Covenant, IA C2Revised Initial Study for IA C2 Remedial Action PlanDraft Technical Memorandum: Remediation of PCB-Impacted Concrete, Building 237, IA D1.2Revised Investigation Area D1.3-Central Beneficial Use Exception - Request for Concurrence, IA D1.3-CentralPost Fifth Injection Event and Second 2018 Semi-Annual Groundwater Monitoring Results Report, IR15, IA C1Second 2018 Semi-Annual Groundwater Monitoring Results Report, IR03, IWPS4, OWS T-2, IA C1 Field Work Performed:Building 87 PCB Site UL#01 Investigation and Remediation, IA C1Building 91 PCB Site UL#01 Remediation, IA C1 Building 91 Mercury Remediation, IA C1 (Continuation of Remediation)Upcoming Field Work:Building 87 PCB Site UL#01 Investigation and Remediation, IA C1 (Continuation of Investigation and Remediation)Building 91 PCB Site UL#01 Remediation, IA C1 (Continuation of Remediation)Building 91 Mercury Remediation, IA C1 (Continuation of Remediation)DOM-6 Corrective Action Plan Implementation, IA C1 (Continuation of Remediation)Cooling Water Loop-Intake Arm Corrective Action Plan Implementation, IA C1 (Continuation of Remediation)Building 116 PCB Site UL#01, IA C2 (Initiation of Remediation)Building 206 / 208 Area Removal Action Plan Implementation, IA C2 (Initiation of Remediation)

Attachment 5. Weston Mare Island RAB Update, January 2019

January 2019

INVESTIGATION AREA H1 (IA-H1) AND WESTERN EARLY TRANSFER PARCEL (WETP) - DOCUMENT STATUS

The Final Land Use Control Remedial Design for Installation Restoration Site 05, Dredge Pond 7S, and the Western Magazine Area has been submitted to the regulatory agencies for review/ concurrence. This is the final non-recurring document required by the Environmental Services Cooperative Agreement for the WETP.

MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES

WESTON continues maintenance activities for the San Pablo Bay Trail (part of the WETP property) and the IA-H1 Leachate and Groundwater Collection System. The first semi-annual groundwater monitoring event for IA-H1 this year is scheduled for March.