weccAd Info
 Alameda Point: Environmental Justice Progress Report

EJ Progress Report

About EJPP

2001 EJPP Archives

2000 EJPP Archives

1999 EJPP Archives

1998 EJPP Archives

1997 EJPP Archives

Alameda Point

Toxic Maps

Radioactive Sites

Leaking Tanks


Home Page




1997 Archives


October 1997 Edition

  • ARRA Proposes School on Toxic Site! - Ignorance or Expectations?
  • Preliminary Results of Environmental Baseline Surveys

    • Tiered Screening
    • BRAC Categories
    • Residual Risk

  • News in Brief

August 1997 Edition

  • Community Acceptance Criteria Completed
  • List of Contaminated Sites Getting Longer
  • Upcoming Public Meetings/Comment Periods

July 1997 Edition

  • Partnering Creating an Environment of Trust and Respect
  • Mayor and ARRA Focus on Cleanup Quality, Dellums warns about Funding
  • Interim Uses Proposed for Alameda Point
    • Master Use Permit
    • Negative Declaration
    • Flawed Initial Study
    • City's Proposed Mitigation Measures

  • West End, Can it be Improved?
  • Measures Necessary to Support Mitigated Negative Declaration
  • Upcoming Public Meetings and Comment Periods

June 1997 Edition

  • Documenting pollution - Navy/Cal-EPA stand-off enters fourth year
    • Navy and Cal-EPA keep RAB outside dispute resolution
    • All things being equal - State versus Community Acceptance
    • Is Navy cleanup plan racist? - Equal protection is a civil right

  • Cleanup plans for PCB and Lead contaminated soil (Site 15 and Site 16)
    • Site 16 in shadows of Encinal High School
    • Cleanup alternatives proposed by Navy are they?

  • Has Alameda Center for Environmental Technologies thrown in the shovel?

May 1997 Edition

  • Navy walks away from table creates show-down with Cal-EPA
    • RAB responds to ensure community concerns addressed in negotiations.
    • Lack of local politcal leadership on cleanup issues contributing factor.

  • Navy cited for violating toxic waste laws
    • Toxic Waste Violations at NAS are not isolated occurrences.
    • Hazardous Waste Facilities proposed for reuse by Navy.

    April 1997 Edition

    • Navy Firefighters subjects of Dose Reconstruction Project
      • Would West-end residents benefit from a similar project?
      • New EPA report raises concerns about PCB cleanup sites at NAS.
      • Different view points on health effects of PCBs.

    • How Cleanup Levels are determined.
      • Typical pathways for human exposure to chemicals.
      • Example of cleanup level determination.
      • Questions about risk assessment answered.

    March 1997 Edition

    • Document Production Schedule
    • RAB Meetings moved to Neutral Turf
      • Highlights of DOD's Public Participation Checklist

    • Presentation by Navy Firefighters exposed to PCBs
    • Update on Community Acceptance Criteria
      • Proposed Community Acceptance Criteria for Buffer Zones

    • Is Site 1 Cleanup Technology Demonstration a Failure?

    February 1997 Edition

    • Cleanup Schedule Update
    • Tiered Screening Method Introduced
      • Is tiered screening an environmental justice issue?
      • Tiered screening workshop to be held March 18, 1997.

    • Community Acceptance Criteria Update
      • Proposed soil handling and excavation criteria

    • Is the Northwest Territory going to waste?

    January 1997 Edition

    • NAS Cleanup and Environmental Justice
      • Environmental Justice Principles
      • Executive Order 12898
      • Federal Facilities Environmental Restoration Dialogue Committee
      • East Bay Conversion and Reinvestment Commission

    • Environmental Program Summary
    • Facts on NAS Alameda Cleanup Activities
    • Good Neighbor Agreement Introduced

    The Environmental Justice Progress Report is the newsletter of West End Concerned Citizens (WECC). WECC has been monitoring the toxic cleanup planning process at the Alameda Point Naval Air Station (NAS) since 1995. Our community members have become increasingly frustrated at the lack of response to the public's concerns, the inadequate information provided to the public, and the lack of opportunities for the public to participate in the decision making process.

    March 1, 1999