ATTACHMENT #2
FACT SHEET: UNITED HECKATHORN SUPERFUND SITE COMMUNITY CLEANUP PLAN PROVIDED BY THE RICHMOND SHORELINE ALLIANCE, SF BAYKEEPER & SIERRA CLUB SF BAY
CHAPTER
The Facts ●
Richmond is an environmental justice community: nearly 15% of residents live below the
poverty
line
and
approximately
80%
identify
as
people
of
color.
●
The United Heckathorn Superfund Site spans 20 acres in the Richmond Inner Harbor:
five
acres
of
land
and
15 acres
of
marine
sediments
in
the
Lauritzen
Channel
and
Parr
Canal.
●
From 1944 to 1966, chemical companies at the site formulated, packaged, and shipped
toxic
pesticides—including
DDT
and
dieldrin—allowing
pesticide
spillage,
wash
water,
and
residues
to
drain
directly
into
the
channel
and
seep
into
the
ground
unchecked.
●
In 1990, the U.S. EPA declared United Heckathorn a Superfund site and placed it on the
National
Priorities
List.
●
In the mid-1990s the U.S. EPA oversaw a cleanup that never fully met its compliance goals.
The
agency’s
first
post-remediation
monitoring
event
in
January
1998
(nine
months
after
dredging
was
completed
in
April
1997)
already
showed
DDT
and
dieldrin
levels
in
the
marine
area
exceeded
cleanup
goals.
This
was
documented
and
confirmed
in
the
first
Five-Year
Review
(September
2001)
and
subsequent
reviews.
●
Samples collected in 2013 and 2016 found DDT and dieldrin at concentrations up to 3,800
times
higher
than
acceptable
standards.
●
A ' Do Not Eat' advisory for fish caught in and near the channel, although posted in the
affected
area,
has
not
been
made
enforceable
nor
is
voluntary
compliance
monitored.
Notwithstanding,
people
continue
to
frequently
fish
in
the
area.
●
The Lauritzen Channel now has more DDT than before the mid-1990s cleanup .
Fish
sampled
from
the
channel
show
DDT
levels
hundreds
of
times
higher
than
fish
caught
elsewhere
in
San
Francisco
Bay.
Why the First Cleanup Failed ●
The first cleanup failed due to 1) a flawed cleanup plan, 2) inadequate oversight and quality
control,
and
3)
minimal
community
involvement.
As
a
result,
contaminated
materials
were
left
behind,
resulting
in
DDT
and
dieldrin
leaching
into
the
marine
environment
nonstop
for
nearly
30 more
years.
●
Moreover, intermittent seeps and groundwater intrusion have been identified as ongoing
sources
of
DDT
re-entering
the
channel—a
contamination
pathway
the
first
cleanup
never
addressed
.
The Health Threat ●
DDT and dieldrin are classified by the U.S. EPA as probable human carcinogens.
Both
are
banned
from
use
in
the
United
States
(DDT
since
1972;
dieldrin
since
1974).
●
These chemicals are associated with liver cancer, premature birth, respiratory illness, and
type
2 diabetes
in
humans.
●
DDT and dieldrin severely damage the nervous system, liver, and reproductive health of
fish,
birds,
and
other
wildlife.
●
The primary route of human exposure is eating fish, shellfish, or other wildlife contaminated
by
DDT
or
dieldrin
that
have
migrated
out
of
the
channel
to
nearby
fishing
sites.
●
Richmond residents who rely on local fishing for food face the greatest direct health risk,
a
serious
environmental
justice
concern
that
demands
urgent
action.
Nearly 30 years of EPA Indifference and Inaction ●
Even after repeated EPA Five-Year reviews showed the first cleanup didn’t work, the U.S.
EPA
only
began
developing
a
new
cleanup
plan
in
2012—now
nearly
30 years
of
delay
while
contamination
persists
and
worsens.
●
EPA has stated it will not share cleanup options until the formal public comment period
begins,
contradicting
its
own
policy
of
including
community
input
during
the
planning
process.
●
EPA's proposed cleanup plan is anticipated in late August 2026. Without strong community
and
City
Council
pressure,
there
is
a
real
risk
of
another
inadequate
remedy
that
repeats
the
failures
of
the
first
cleanup.
Climate Change Makes This More Urgent ●
Sea level and groundwater rise were not considered in the 1990s cleanup, a critical omission
the
new
plan
must
correct.
●
Climate change is expected to accelerate erosion of contaminated upland areas, potentially
spreading
DDT
and
dieldrin
further
into
San
Francisco
Bay.
●
Any cleanup plan that leaves contaminated materials in place will be undermined by rising
seas
and
increased
storm
intensity,
risking
another
failed
cleanup
.
The Community Cleanup Plan: What We're Asking For ●
ISOLATE AND DRAIN THE CHANNEL : Build a temporary waterproof barrier (caisson)
across
the
mouth
of
the
Lauritzen
Channel
and
pump
out
the
water
so
crews
can
work
in
relatively
dry
conditions—avoiding
underwater
dredging
which
spreads
contamination
and
contributed
to
the
first
cleanup's
failure.
●
COMPLETELY REMOVE ALL CONTAMINATED MATERIALS : Remove all pile supported
structures/wharfs,
pilings,
rip-rap
material
and
debris,
contaminated
sediment,
and
contaminated
soil
from
the
channel
sidewalls
and
upland
areas.
Excavate
the
sidewalls
until
clean
material
is
reached,
adding
supports
to
prevent
potential
cave-ins.
Remove
any
structure
on
higher
ground
that
has
contamination
underneath
and
remove
corresponding
contamination.
Locate
and
remove
any
pipes
that
could
leak
potential
residual
contamination
back
into
the
channel.
Remove
and
sample
any
underground
cavities
and
buried
debris
discovered
during
excavation.
●
ADDRESS SEEPS AND GROUNDWATER : Construct a continuous perimeter concrete
barrier/retaining
wall
around
the
Lauritzen
Channel
(3
sides).
Behind
the
continuous
perimeter
barrier,
construct
a
comprehensive
groundwater
collection
and
treatment system to prohibit further uncontrolled groundwater contamination from reaching
the
channel.
●
DISPOSE OFFSITE : All contaminated materials must be removed and disposed of offsite.
Leaving
capped
material
in
place
is
not
a
permanent
solution.
●
RIGOROUS POST-CLEANUP MONITORING : Implement a rigorous post-cleanup monitoring
program
including
shellfish
tissue
sampling
on
transects
from
the
cleanup
site
to
San
Francisco
Bay,
and
tissue
testing
of
fish
species
commonly
caught
by
fishers,
to
monitor
the
cleanup’s
long-term
effectiveness
and
the
safety
of
local
fishing.
●
PROTECT WORKERS : Under CERCLA (the federal Superfund law), Responsible Parties
are
legally
obligated
to
cover
all
costs
of
cleanup,
which
should
include
fair
compensation
for
workers
whose
employment
is
affected
by
work
stoppages
during
remediation.
Worker
protection
is
part
of
the
cost
of
cleanup.
Who Are the Responsible Parties? ●
Under CERCLA, the companies responsible for contaminating a site are legally required
to
pay
for
its
cleanup—
not
taxpayers,
not
workers,
and
not
the
community
.
Why the City Council Should Act Now ●
The U.S. EPA is expected to issue its proposed cleanup plan by late August 2026.
The
City
Council's
endorsement
of
a
complete
cleanup
now
will
send
a
powerful
signal
before
a
new
proposed
plan
is
formally
issued.
●
Richmond's residents have waited more than 30 years for the U.S. EPA to do its job and
fully
clean
up
the
United
Heckathorn
site,
and
over
80 years
since
cancer-causing
DDT
and
dieldrin
have
contaminated
the
surrounding
area
and
the
San
Francisco
Bay.
The
City
Council
has
a
powerful
and
impactful
voice
to
demand
nothing
less
than
a
complete
and
lasting
remedy.
●
A strong City Council resolution demonstrates to EPA that the full weight of local government
stands
with
the
community's
demand
for
a
cleanup
that
is
complete,
equitable,
and
built
to
last.
●
A complete and thus extensive cleanup will set the stage to redevelop and modernize this
area
to
open
new
opportunities
for
the
Port
and
the
City
of
Richmond,
increased
revenue,
and
employment.
●
Environmental cleanup doesn’t prohibit reuse; it facilitates and enhances reuse.