Most frustrating. Back in November I had a conversation with one of the project managers who indicated they were “caught by surpise” when the November storm damaged the retaining provisions and heavily silted the creek. According to him at the time they were taking new measures including installing a collection tank. The sandbag and tank approach does not seem to be viable, and some type of additional drainage tied into the parking lot system seems needed. There are many more issues with this remediation than meet the eye and neighbors attention.

Large Erosional Gully at Landfill 8 (click photo to enlarge)

Earlier this week, a series of big storms from the ongoing El Nino weather pattern created major problems for two Presidio remediation sites.  These new concerns are indeed alarming given the disturbing trends identified by concerned citizens on January 11, 2010 to the Trust Board of Directors.

At Landfill 8, a large erosional gully formed and channeled huge amounts of cover material and debris well off the site. The Department of Toxic Substances Control issued this emergency letter on January 21st, 2010 requiring the Trust to act.  At Landfill 10, the parking area for the Public Health Services hospital, there has been major erosion on the slope, sending tons of cover material mixed with debris into native habitat and severely damaging the landfill cover.

Presidio neighbors living at the 15th Avenue Gate adjacent to Landfill 10 have been plagued by flooding as the new construction and rains combined.

View detailed photos and maps of the erosion and spread of cover soil and debris at Landfills 8 and 10, in addition to the flooding at the 15th Avenue Gate.

–Doug Kern

–Doug Kern

–Doug Kern

We’ve talked about the historic importance of Landfill 8 previously, noting that the landfill covers an historic Merchant Marine cemetery with 30,000 cubic yards of contaminated waste. Read this paper by the Trust on the cemetery’s history.

The Trust will propose to cover the landfill and buried cemetery with an additional 3 to 5 feet of sand at a cost of about $1,000,000. The landfill waste materials contain pesticides, PAHs, and metals such as lead, cadmium and zinc.

For a national park the more appropriate remedy is to remove the waste material as has been done at many other Presidio sites. The cost will be more expensive, about $5,000,000, but the solution will be permanent and we will not burden future generations with contamination in the park.

At Landfill 10, the site will remain a parking lot for the Public Health Service Hospital. The slope of the landfill to the west will be exposed waste material and will be covered only with vegetation. While the contaminant levels appear to be low in the landfill material, there is a chance that contamination will be exposed when the slope is cut back for seismic stability purposes.

A public comment period is scheduled to begin on November 17 and run through December 22, 2008. I recommend that interested members of the public request the decision documents from the Presidio Trust when they are released on November 17. If you need additional time to review the materials request a time extension from the Department of Toxic Substances Control and the Presidio Trust. According to a Presidio electronic newsletter article released on Tuesday November 4, 2008:

• The documents will be available in the Presidio Trust Library, 34 Graham Street. 
• They will also be available on the website. 
• Send written comments to: Bob Boggs, DTSC, 700 Heinz Avenue, Suite 200, Berkeley, CA 94710-2721 (email: rboggs@dtsc.ca.gov); 
• OR Eileen Fanelli, Presidio Trust, P.O. Box 29052, 34 Graham Street, San Francisco, CA  94129. 
• A public meeting on Draft Remedial Action Plan will be held on Tuesday, December 9, (meeting moved up, due to conflict with Main Post meeting on December 9th) Tuesday, December 2nd, 6 pm, Presidio Officers’ Club, 50 Moraga Avenue. If you have questions, call (415) 561-5418.

More on the subject of Landfills 8 and 10 in the coming days.

–Doug Kern

Back in 1994 I commented on the Army’s Record of Decision for the Public Health Service Hospital (PHSH) which included Landfill 8, a 2.6 acre deposit of rubble and debris up to 15 feet deep, located just to the north and behind the PHSH. I was deeply concerned that this landfill was placed over an old neglected merchant marine cemetery. The poor treatment of this forgotten cemetery was not appropriate within a national park. Something more needed to happen.

The years went by.  Priorities came and went.  The cemetery remained, buried under waste.

Periodically, the Presidio Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) would comment on the subject. In 1997 the RAB developed a set of Landfill Closure Principles and passed a Landfill Resolution.

As recently as 2006, the RAB submitted this comment to the Presidio Trust regarding Landfill 8.

We believe that the Presidio is better served in the long run by excavating a portion of the waste that currently covers the cemetery, without disturbing the remains.  We believe that the extra costs associated with this remedy are small compared with the benefits of additional waste removal.  The additional 3 feet of debris and waste removed from over top of the cemetery in Alternative 5A more appropriately addresses a permanent and respectful treatment of the cemetery, while at the same time, leaves space for the proposed sand cover material, so that a 5 foot mound is not created as we visualize would occur in remedy 5B. 

Now, due to the development at the PHSH, the site remedy has been moved to the front burner. The team is working on a final remedy for this site. There are metals, pesticides and other contaminants at or near the surface of the landfill. The Presidio Trust favors covering the area with three to five feet of sand, restoring native dune habitat and creating a memorial for the Marine Hospital Cemetery.  This remedy would protect human health and the environment by covering up the area. It would also not disturb any human remains.

While I think this would work, we still haven’t fully vetted this situation. There are a large number of bodies (between 500 and 600) buried at this site. The interred are from many countries.  A large effort has been made by the Presidio Trust to understand the origin of the remains and a site history compilation is contained in this thoughtful report.  Here is a very brief excerpt on the nationalities of those interred at the site.

The sailors buried in the Hospital Cemetery hailed from ports all over the world. The list in Appendix D represents 30 of the United States and 43 countries. After American sailors, most came from Sweden, followed by Norway, Finland, Germany and Ireland. Some even came from such exotic locales as Tahiti and the Cape Verde Islands. It is quite possible that these foreign sailors ended up in the Hospital Cemetery because they were unable to communicate information regarding family or friends to their doctors.

I believe that we must examine this situation more closely prior to implementing a final remedy, which would further bury the site. We need to examine the various laws that are relevant to this complex issue. When that analysis is complete we may then consider whether it is indeed appropriate and necessary to engage in a larger project to carefully restore this piece of Presidio history.  Here is an article originally published in the San Francisco Call on March 29, 1896 that gives a sense of the history we need to preserve.

– Doug Kern

– Doug Kern

The short term work to smooth the top of the slide area to prevent toppling failure will occur next Wednesday (May 21st). The work is anticipated to take one day. Equipment will mobilize to site on May 20th. The beach will be cleared and personnel stationed there during the smoothing work to advise beachgoers of the activity, and monitor for safety.

Comments welcomed.

– Doug Kern

– Doug Kern