【By Chen Sijia, Observers Network】Recently, the U.S. Navy has been accused of concealing a nuclear leak near San Francisco, sparking anger among local residents. According to a report by The Guardian on November 27, the U.S. Navy discovered in November last year that the air at Hunters Point Naval Shipyard near San Francisco had an excessive level of plutonium-239, but it wasn't until late October this year that the results were made public, covering up for nearly a year.
Hunters Point is located east of San Francisco. From 1946 to 1969, it was a U.S. military laboratory that studied the effects of nuclear weapons, mainly focusing on how to decontaminate warships and equipment that had been hit by nuclear attacks. In the 1950s, the U.S. Navy used Hunters Point to decontaminate 79 warships that had been exposed to radiation during nuclear tests in the Pacific, leading to radioactive pollutants spreading throughout the shipyard.
The Hunters Point Shipyard was closed in 1974, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) included it in the "Superfund" program in 1989, effectively recognizing Hunters Point as one of the most polluted areas in the United States. For over three decades, the U.S. Navy and the city of San Francisco have been working to clean up the area, hoping to rebuild Hunters Point into residential, commercial, and park land.
However, recent findings by San Francisco residents revealed that the U.S. Navy had concealed the recent radioactive pollution at Hunters Point and did not promptly inform the public of the test results. According to the report, the U.S. Navy collected air samples from Hunters Point last November, and an abnormal sample detected an excessive level of plutonium-239, with radiation levels more than twice the U.S. Navy's "action standard."
Plutonium-239 is a radioactive substance, and exposure to it in the air can cause cellular damage and radiation sickness. Inhalation of it can lead to cancer.
U.S. Navy Shipyard at Hunters Point, San Francisco, The San Francisco Chronicle
The U.S. Navy did not immediately release the results, and it wasn't until late October this year that the San Francisco government and residents found out about the information. In response, a U.S. Navy spokesperson explained, "Our regulatory action levels are deliberately and conservatively set below levels that pose health risks. Even if we detect plutonium-239 at this level, it does not pose a threat to human health or public safety."
The navy spokesperson told The Los Angeles Times that the abnormal air sample came from Block C in the northeastern part of the Hunters Point Shipyard. Since 2023, the U.S. Navy has collected over 200 environmental air samples from Block C, and "the sample from November 2024 was the only one with elevated plutonium-239 levels."
The Guardian reported that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) then announced that the U.S. Navy retested the samples, and the second test did not show any abnormal readings. The U.S. Navy believes that the plutonium content in the air and the time people may be exposed to it are within a "safe range."
However, this act of withholding information has still caused suspicion and concern among various sectors in San Francisco. They question whether the U.S. Navy has the capability to clean up the nuclear pollution at Hunters Point. Jeff Ruch, a legal counsel for the non-profit organization "Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility," criticized the U.S. Navy for trying to avoid responsibility and unwilling to spend billions of dollars on proper cleanup.
He also pointed out that in the 1950s, workers at the Hunters Point Shipyard tried to clean ships that had gone through nuclear tests using brooms, indicating that the government at the time did not know how to handle radioactive materials. Later, the workers performed sandblasting on these ships, but the sand was reused around the shipyard.
"Thousands of tons of radioactive sand have never been accounted for, and they have been buried," Ruch said, "Where are they buried? The Navy doesn't know, and they don't want to look for them."
Steve Castleman, an environmental law expert at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, stated that the U.S. Navy did not provide data to support its explanation, and the act of withholding the test reports has already raised doubts among community residents and public health groups, "Can you trust them to report honestly?"
A San Francisco city health official stated in a statement, "It is crucial to maintain complete transparency with our community and public health departments. We are just as concerned as everyone else about the 11-month delay in communication from the Navy."
However, some experts believe the issue might have been "exaggerated." Kathryn Higley, a nuclear science professor at Oregon State University, said, "I understand the frustration of the local residents who want to see the pollution cleaned up so that it can be safely used. There are many reasons why this process has taken so long, but from a radiological perspective, the actual remaining radioactivity at this location is quite limited."
Higley believes that the history of the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, along with the U.S. Navy's 11-month delay in releasing the test data, may have exacerbated the concerns of San Francisco residents.
Michael Pound, the environmental coordinator responsible for the cleanup of Hunters Point by the U.S. Navy, has apologized to the public of San Francisco, saying, "I've spent a lot of time engaging with the community to understand your concerns, transparency, and trust. But in this case, we didn't do well."
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stated that it has requested the U.S. Navy to provide all data to verify the results, "The EPA will prioritize reviewing the plutonium-239 test results to ultimately determine the risk level to the public."
This article is an exclusive publication of Observers Network. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited.
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7577768708517495337/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the 【Like/Dislike】 button below.