Nearly all U.S. Navy radiation samples were falsified, fraudulent or unreliable
by Kirsten Stade, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility
Washington, D.C. – Troubles afflicting the nearly 30-year radiation cleanup of San Francisco’s Hunters Point Shipyard are far worse than previously reported. Between 90 and 97 percent of the U.S. Navy soil samples re-examined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are “neither reliable nor defensible,” according to an EPA review released April 9 by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
The Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in the city’s southeast corner was the site of nuclear weapons research causing widespread radiological contamination. Navy ships contaminated by hydrogen bomb tests in the Pacific were taken to Hunters Point for decontamination, which left the shipyard heavily polluted with radioactivity. It has been an EPA Superfund site since 1989. In today’s real estate-mad San Francisco, it is slated for the largest redevelopment since the 1906 earthquake.
Beginning in 2010, employees of the Navy’s site consultant, Tetra Tech, reported extensive data manipulation, falsification and other efforts to minimize evidence of soil contamination. In the fall of 2017, internal Navy analyses of these measurements concluded that nearly half of the sampling was suspect.
The EPA performed its own review, which found data falsification and quality deficiencies were far wider and deeper than the Navy had admitted. On two major parcels covering 40 percent of the site, EPA found 90 percent of samples were suspect on one and 97 percent were suspect on the other.
Troubles afflicting the nearly 30-year radiation cleanup of San Francisco’s Hunters Point Shipyard are far worse than previously reported.
The Navy, by contrast, recommended resampling in only 15 percent of the samples from the first parcel and 49 percent of the second. In its Dec. 27, 2017, comments on the Navy’s submission, EPA Superfund Manager John Chesnutt wrote:
“The data revealed not only potential purposeful falsification and fraud in terms of sample and/or data manipulation, they also reveal the potential failure to conduct adequate scans, a lack of proper chain of custody for ensuring samples were not tampered with, extensive data quality issues (including off-site laboratory data) and general mis-management of the entire characterization and cleanup project.”
“Hunters Point is unfolding into the biggest case of eco-fraud in U.S. history,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, who obtained the EPA review under the Freedom of Information Act. “What makes these findings so remarkable is that the Navy was on notice for years that it had a major data meltdown on its hands yet is still trying to cook the books.”
“Hunters Point is unfolding into the biggest case of eco-fraud in U.S. history,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, who obtained the EPA review under the Freedom of Information Act.
This spreading data manipulation scandal obscures the true level of contamination remaining at the site. As many as a dozen years of sampling may be worthless. EPA is still reviewing the testing at other parcels covering 60 percent of the site, so there may be more shoes to drop. Further, there is growing concern that the standard used by the Navy for what is “clean” has also been manipulated to significantly downplay dangers.
This spreading data manipulation scandal obscures the true level of contamination remaining at the site. As many as a dozen years of sampling may be worthless.
“The Navy created an environmental nightmare on this stretch of the San Francisco Bay but instead of cleaning it up has spent the past several years compounding it,” added Ruch, noting that EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt claims that reforming Superfund is a top priority. “Besides being a poster child for reform of the Superfund program, this case cries out for accountability from the Navy, its contractor and the EPA.”
See the data for yourself:
- Read the EPA comment summary
- See table summarizing bad rad data
- View text of EPA comments
- Compare the Navy submission summary
- Look at EPA letter referencing ongoing reviews on other parcels
- Note Pruitt’s relaxed stance on radiation danger
All content © 2017 Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, 962 Wayne Ave., Suite 610, Silver Spring, MD 20910, 202-265-PEER (7337), https://www.peer.org/.