HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06061995 - SD11 SD. 11
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on _June 6, 1995_, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Smith, DeSaulnier, Torlakson, Bishop
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Proposal for a Containerized Vessel Support System
at the Concord Naval Weapons Station
The Board received a letter dated May 21, 1995, from Sam
Dennis, Supervisor, Land/Air Section, U. S. Department of the
Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 900 Commodore Drive,
San Bruno, California 94066-5006, advising that the Navy is
proposing to construct and operate a containerized vessel support
system at the Concord Naval Weapons Station, and inviting
comments on the Review Environmental Assessment (REA) to be
received by June 23, 1995.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the aforesaid REA is
REFERRED to the Community Development Director.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND
CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND
ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN .
ATTESTED: _June 6, 1995
Phil Batchelor,Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors and County Administrator
By_ Deputy
cc: Director, CDD
I
i
i
I
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
ENGINEERING FIELD ACTIVITY,WEST
NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND
900 COMMODORE DRIVE
�I SAN BRUNO,CALIFORNIA 940665006 IN REPLY REFER TO:
5090.1B
Ser 1851BF/EP-776
2 1 _MAY_ -19951
TO: ALL INTERESTED GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, PUBLIC GROUPS, AND
INDIVIDUALS
The Navy is proposing to construct and operate a containerized vessel support system at the
Naval Weapons Station, Concord, Contra Costa County, Concord California.
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and Navy regulations, the Navy has
prepared a Review Environmental Assessment (REA) on the proposed action. The REA
provides details about the proposed action and its impacts. This REA will become final after
public review comments have been evaluated and addressed, and a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI), if applicable, has been prepared. Implementation of the action will not occur
until the FONSI has been published. A copy of the REA, for your information and review, is
enclosed with this letter.
The Navy requests your comments on the REA and on the proposed action. They must be
received at the address below not later than 23 June 1995, in order to be incorporated into the
final EA. Faxes are accepted. The published FONSI will be sent to those on the proposed
project's mailing list. If you have any questions regarding the EA, the point of contact is Mr.
Barry Franklin, (415) 244-3018, Autovon 494-3018, fax (415) 244-3737. Mailed comments can
be sent to the address on the letterhead.
Thank you for your cooperation and review of this EA.
SAM DENNIS
SUPERVISOR, I AND/AIR SECTION
Enclosure: (1) Review Environmental Assessment
RECEIVED
MAY
23 M
CLERK 80 .4D OF
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
ENGINEERING FIELD ACTIVITY,WEST
NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND
900 COMMODORE DRIVE
SAN BRUNO,CALIFORNIA 94066-5006 IN REPLY REFER TO:
5090.1 B
Ser 1851BF/EP-776
2 i _MAY_ .)9951
TO: ALL INTERESTED GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, PUBLIC GROUPS, AND
INDIVIDUALS
The Navy is proposing to construct and operate a containerized vessel support system at the
Naval Weapons Station, Concord, Contra Costa County, Concord California.
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and Navy regulations, the Navy has
prepared a Review Environmental Assessment (REA) on the proposed action. The REA
provides details about the proposed action and its impacts. This REA will become final after
public review comments have been evaluated and addressed, and a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI), if applicable, has been prepared. Implementation of the action will not occur
until the FONSI has been published. A copy of the REA, for your information and review, is
enclosed with this letter.
The Navy requests your comments on the REA and on the proposed action. They must be
received at the address below not later than 23 June 1995, in order to be incorporated into the
final EA. Faxes are accepted. The published FONSI will be sent to those on the proposed
project's mailing list. If you have any questions regarding the EA, the point of contact is Mr.
Barry Franklin, (415) 244-3018, Autovon 494-3018, fax (415) 244-3737. Mailed comments can
be sent to the address on the letterhead.
Thank you for your cooperation and review of this EA.
SAM DENNIS
SUPERVISOR, LAND/AIR SECTION
Enclosure: (1) Review Environmental Assessment
RECEIVED
w 23 IM
CLERK BOARD OF S F-ET- VISORS
AGENDA DATE ITEM N0.
BACKGROUND NOT AVAILABLE AT
THE TIME AGENDA PACKET COMPILED
INFORMATION FOR THIS ITEM PREVIOUSLY
FURNISHED
ORAL REPORT TO BE GIVEN AT BOARD MEETING
ERROR IN NUMBERING AGENDA ITEM
DELETED
L DOCUMENTS ON FILE WITH
CLERK
Environmental Assessment
Containerization Project
Naval Weapons Station Concord
Concord, California
Prepared for
U.S. Department of Navy
Engineering Field Activity, West
900 Commodore Drive
San Bruno, California 94066-2402
Attention: Barry Franklin
Naval Weapons Station Concord
10 Delta Street
Concord, California 94520
Attention: Richard W. Pieper
May 1995
i
r
Environmental Assessment
Containerization Project
Naval Weapons Station Concord
r.
Concord, California
r
Prepared for
U.S. Department of Navy
Engineering Field Activity, West
900 Commodore Drive
San Bruno, California 94066-2402
Attention: Barry Franklin
,r
Naval Weapons Station Concord
10 Delta Street
Concord, California 94520
Attention: Richard W. Pieper
r
r
I
May 1995
r
Environmental Assessment
Containerization Project
Naval Weapons Station Concord
Concord, California
Prepared for
U.S. Department of Navy
Engineering Field Activity, West
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
900 Commodore Drive
San Bruno, California 94066-2402
Attention: Barry Franklin
Naval Weapons Station Concord
10 Delta Street
Concord, California 94520
Attention: Richard W. Pieper
May 1995
Environmental Assessment
Containerization Project
Naval Weapons Station Concord
Concord, California
i .
Abstract
This Environmental Assessment analyzes the
potential impacts on the human environment
resulting from the implementation of Naval
Weapons Station (NWS) Concord
Containerization Project alternatives. The
project involves the construction of a rail and
truck explosives holding yard, railcar loading
dock and interchange and an upgrade to Pier 3
to support two 40-ton capacity container cranes.
The proposed action would allow MVS Concord
to support a throughput of 520 containers per
day. Although the rate at which containerized
ammunition could be processed would increase,
the total amount of ammunition processed
through the station would remain the same.
' The use of other West coast facilities was
considered but deemed infeasible due to low
ammunition net explosive weight (NEW)
capabilities and concomitant risk to public
health and safety. One other alternative at NWS
Concord (upgrading Piers 2 and 3 to
1 accommodate six harbor cranes, constructing
holding pad barricades entirely of earth, and
constructing the rail interchange vard to the
south and east of Union Pacific Railroad right-
of-way) was evaluated and eliminated from
further consideration, and a No Action
alternative was examined. Implementation of
the proposed action would create less than
significant impacts for biological resources,
cultural resources, geology/soils/seismicity,
hydrology, air quality, visual and aesthetics,
transportation and circulation, and utilities. No
significant or potential)}' significant impacts
were identified in the analysis.
K37303-H 11
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVESUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 LOCATION OF PROPOSED ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.3 APPLICABLE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND COORDINATION . . . . . . . . 1
2.0 SCOPING PROCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.0 ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1 CRITERIA FOR ALTERNATIVE SELECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3 DESCRIPTION OF NO ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT NOT BROUGHT FORWARD IN THIS
DOCUMENT FOR DETAILED ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.1.1 Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.1.2 Terrestrial Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.1.3 Wetland Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.1.4 Aquatic Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.1.5 Special-Status Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.2 CULTURAL RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
' 4.2.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4.2.2 Prehistory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.2.3 Ethnography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.2.4 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.5 Project Activity Area Site Summary 27
4.3 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
1 4.3.1 Geology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.3.2 Soils 27
4.3.3 Seismicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.4 HYDROLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.5 AIR QUALITY ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.5.1 Climate 30
4.5.2 Applicable Air Quality Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.5.3 Existing Air Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.6 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 34
4.7 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
' 4.8 VISUAL AND AESTHETICS
4.9 LAND USE . . . . . . 35
36
4.9.1 Land Use Adjacent to the Tidal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.9.2 Plans and Policies /Regulatory Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
1 4.10 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.11 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION . 40
4.12 UTILITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.12.1 Electrical Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
K37303-H
1
4.12.2 Potable Water Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.12.3 Sewage Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.1.1 Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.1.2 No Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.2 CULTURAL RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 46
5.2.1 Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.2.2 No Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.3 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.3.1 Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.3.2 No Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
5.4 HYDROLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
5.4.1 Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
5.4.2 No Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
5.5 AIR QUALITY . . . . . . . 48
5.5.1 Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
5.5.2 No Action . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . 49
5.6 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.6.1 Proposed Action . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.6.2 No Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.7 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.7.1 Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.7.2 No Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.8 VISUAL AND AESTHETICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.8.1 Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.8.2 No Action . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . 53
5.9 LAND USE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
5.9.1 Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
5.9.1.1 Land Use within the Tidal Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
5.9.1.2 Land Use Adjacent to the Tidal Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
5.9.1.3 Plans and Policies /Regulatory Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 53
5.9.2 No Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5.10 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5.11 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5.11.1 Proposed Action . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . 54
5.11.2 No Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.12 UTILITIES . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.12.1 Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5.12.2 No Action . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
6.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS REQUIRED BY NEPA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.1 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS . . . . . . . . . 57
6.2 IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES . . . . . . . . 57
6.3 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES AND ENHANCEMENT OF
LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
K37303-H IV
8.0 PERSONS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
8.1 PERSONS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED DURING THE PREPARATION OF
THIS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . 61
8.2 PERSONS, AGENCIES, AND ORGANIZATIONS TO WHOM THIS
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
' 9.0 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • •
APPENDIXES
A PUBLIC NOTICE RESPONSES
B BIOLOGICAL DATA
C CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
1
K37303-H V
1
LIST OF FIGURES
1-1 Project Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3-1 Conceptual Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3-2 Schematic Cross-Section of Ammunition Pier Container Crane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3-3 Schematic Cross-Section of Typical Railroad/Truck Explosives Holding Pad . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.1-1 Plant Community Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.4-1 Surface Water Drainage Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.8-1 Pier 3 as Viewed Toward the East From Pier 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.8-2 Pier 3 as Viewed Toward the West from Pier 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.8-3 Pier 3 as Viewed Toward the North from Port Chicago Highway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.8-4 Site of Proposed Explosives Holding Yard as Viewed Toward the Northeast from
- Port Chicago Highway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5.7-1 ESQD Arcs Rail and Truck Explosives Holding Yard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.8-1 View of Pier 3 from Suisun Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
K37303-H V1
LIST OF TABLES
ES-1 Summary of Potential Environmental Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
1.3-1 Environmental Laws, Ordinances, and Standards Potentially Required for Authorization
of the Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.1-1 Special-Status Plant and Animal Species Having a High Probability of Occurring in
the Study Area 19
4.5-1 National and California Ambient Ail, Quality Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
i
1
1
K37303-H VI1
This page left intentionally blank.
� i
1
1
K37303-H Viii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Environmental Assessment (EA) analyzes action to construct additional holding pads and
the potential impacts on the human upgrade Pier 3 would allow MN7S Concord to
environment resulting from the - support a throughput of 520 containers per day.
implementation of Naval Weapons Station Although the rate at which containerized
(NWS) Concord Containerization Project ammunition could be processed would increase,
alternatives. This EA has been prepared the total amount of ammunition processed
pursuant to the requirements of the National through the Station would remain the same.
Environmental Policv Act (NEPA), the Council
on Environmental Quality (CEQ) implementing The project location is shown on Figiire 1-1.
regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508), and the U.S.
Navy Environmental and Natural Resources Project Alternative Descriptions
Program Manual (OPNAVINST 5090.1B).
The alternatives considered in this EA are
Purpose and Need implementation of the proposed action, and no
action. The following alternatives were
The ability of the Department of Defense to evaluated and subsequently eliminated from
project military forces and supplies worldwide further consideration as not practicable:
rapidly and effectively has become an
increasingly important component of United Use of other West Coast facilities - deemed
States (U.S.) national military strategy. This infeasible due to low ammunition net
strategy increases reliance on U.S.-based force explosive weight (NEW) capabilities and
projection capability that can deliver the concomitant risk to public health and safety.
requisite military capability when and where
needed. Upgrading Piers 2 and 3 to accommodate six
harbor cranes, constructing holding pad
The Department of Defense (DOD) issued a barricades entirely of earth, and constructing
Mobility Requirements Study that identified rail interchange yard to the south and east of
requirements for a West Coast ammunition Union Pacific Railroad right-of-wav - deemed
port capable of handling 600 containers per infeasible due to potential increase in
day during contingency/mobilization impacts to the aquatic environment, increase
operations (DOD, 1992). The DOD was in rail/truck explosives holding yard footprint
directed to review current capabilities on the and associated effects, and potential effects to
West Coast and reconu-nend options that wetlands.
would allow the movement of 600 containers
per day on a sustained basis. The Environmental Impacts of Proposed
recommended options were for the Naval Alternatives
Weapons Station (NIV17S) Concord to support
the throughput of 520 containers per day and Implementation of the proposed action would
Port Hadlock, Washington, to sustain a create less than significant impacts for biological
throughput of 250 containers per day. resources, cultural resources,
geology/soils/seismicity, hydrology, air quality,
NWS Concord studied the requirements for visual and aesthetics, transportation and
facilities, equipment, and personnel necessary circulation, and utilities. Table ES-1 provides a
to support a West Coast Container Vessel summary of the potential envirorimental impacts
Support System at NNIS Concord. The study associated with the proposed action and no
identified that inadequate holding areas for action alternatives. No significant or potentially
explosive loaded containers and inadequate significant impacts were identified in the
pier support facilities were factors limiting analysis.
throughput at NWS Concord. The proposed
K37303-H Ix
Executive Summary
Scoping Process A public notice was mailed to public agencies
and groups who might be interested in the
EAs briefly discuss the need for the action, proposed action. The Navy received response
evaluate reasonable alternatives, evaluate letters from one federal agency, three state
environmental impacts, and discuss potential agencies, and two local agencies. Issues and
mitigation requirements. Council on concerns were raised in the areas of air quality,
Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR wetlands and water quality, biological resources,
Parts 1500-1508) direct federal agencies public services and utilities, hazardous
responsible for implementation of the National materials/waste, public health and safety, and
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to involve land use. The comments were taken into
environmental agencies, applicants, and the consideration in the preparation of this EA.
public in the preparation of environmental
assessments. The purpose of scoping is to
ensure that problems are identified early and
properly studied; that issues of little
significance do not consume time and effort:
and that the draft EA is thorough and
balanced.
K37303-H x
r -
/ -
� . �
. � ..
�
-
.
a
9
2 a
¢
� ® .
0
$
0
. %
$ .
W �
/
■ •
� SOS
.
% �
I
k \
IT,
\ t y
{ \ ? __ « _ \ i
6 �
�
�
Executive Summary .
This page left intentionally blank
K37303-H xii
1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED
1.1 PURPOSE OF AND NEED reports, and a review of container operations at
FOR PROPOSED ACTION the Port of Oakland, California. The study
identified several factors limiting throughput at
The ability of the Department. of Defense to NWS Concord. The most significant were
project military forces and supplies worldwide inadequate holding area for explosive loaded
rapidly and effectively has become an containers and inadequate pier support facilities.
increasingly important component of United The proposed action to construct additional
States (U.S.) national military strategy. holding pads and upgrade Pier 3 would allow
' Evolving U.S. military strategy requires more NWS Concord to support a throughput of
of our military forces to be based in the 520 containers per day. Although the rate at
United States and the presence overseas to be which containerized ammunition could be
reduced. This strategy increases reliance on processed would increase, the total amount of
United States-based force projection capability ammunition processed through the Station would
that can deliver the requisite military remain the same.
capability when and where needed.
1.2 LOCATION OF PROPOSED
The Department of Defense (DOD) issued a ACTION
Mobility Requirements Study that identified
requirements for a West Coast ammunition NWS Concord consists of nearly 13,000 areas
port capable of handling 600 containers per situated between Suisun Bay and the
day during contingency/mobilization northwestern portion of the City of Concord in
operations (DOD, 1992). The DOD was Contra Costa County, California. It is
directed to review current capabilities on the approximately 15 miles east of the City of
West Coast and recommend options that. Richmond, 2 miles north of Mount Diablo, and
would allow the movement of 600 containers 20 miles northeast of downtown Oakland
per day on a sustained basis. The (Figure 1-1).
recommended options were for the Naval
Weapons Station (NWS) Concord to support 1.3 APPLICABLE REGULATORY
the throughput of 520 containers per day and REQUIREMENTS AND
Port Hadlock, Washington, to sustain a COORDINATION
throughput of 250 containers per day.
Implementation of the proposed action would
NWS Concord studied the requirements for require compliance with several regulatory
facilities, equipment, and personnel necessary requirements. Table 1.3-1 srunmarizes the
to support a West Coast Container Vessel potentially applicable major environmental laws,
Support System at NWS Concord. Input came ordinances, regulations, and standards. Those
from reports, and discussions with Military regulatory requirements relating primarily to land
Sealift Command, Joint Transcom, and MTMC use are described in Section 4.9.2 of this
document.
K37303-H
I
680 SITE
Suisun.
Bay
Clyde 4 '' -----
4
Concord
68�
Pleasant VICINITY MAP
Hill
1
N
0
Naval Weapons Station Concord L'03 CO
Containerization Project
N.T.S. Figure 1 -1 PROJECT LOCATION
IN�
C � '
cr{
r cc
W, trj
t Cc- tri
410
d r OG ? i U ✓ .i �+ U ✓ tC v '.
r co C `L G
d S s- c v, v
G N
co
1 y ^C "cr y
O v v Ti
C3
Tj
•• y r
� d � ?• c; G ,, cc �3
r_
c
y
d
w
G � f
�'1 N
V
G
r
r
n
r
G
v _
C :✓ .� C � i "O G: cC o r
4 C1 C'1• C y r `c
T s" G•
roGu � oCpxN7 C W �
� H o < C y G .► r H (s H y '' J � � � �� r
G ,G � T C -v E'C,. C y.• ,r,,,gyp,, 4mr, O p � G G � '.t �, G
��,, ��,„ ��•. .rr,,, O C: Cr7, .:.+ ., C7 v N .G^. 9 � y CJ w-
�y � � �' :• .G :. G 'rr~., i Com. C u: e.�••. � +"' '"'� �.-G �
CI► U � J .:> G ✓ y L ^• .H.• "' -. tt 'G CCC ^' v�, E " G
�.'- w�- �'i �' V ..�„•, r rte,,. `�" CrC+ 'r"y �^ i�' �Jr„ � � CC ACL` � ,
'!3 d G „'tC "'' C r '� .'�> �•`� r a' '� d � .•. � CHC ,, � •�>,
111 � � •✓ r :► L iri .r C �✓ � CUi. CCC � Y� C ,C .
p► syTor m
v:
N �
C y .c G O
0
r
H
V � ~ t..n/ I• �
.r
Ch
� O
F C
t- o 0
Gv rv •6
r 5 y o
• r r o U C
G
p W u
co C
O
tl�
? � 4
G :-
2.0 SCOPING PROCESS
A public notice was mailed to public agencies Biological Resources. The EA should address
and groups who might be interested in the all potential impacts to biological resources
Proposed Action. The notice provided a and address mitigation measures and
description of the Proposed Action, stated that alternatives that would avoid impacts.
an Environmental Assessment was being
prepared, and requested comments concerning Public Services and Utilities. The EA should
the Proposed Action. A copy of this notice discuss pollution prevention and energy
and responses to the notice are provided in conservation opportunities related to the
Appendix A. proposed action. The EA should address the
adequacy of the holding pad barricades to
The Navv received response letters from one contain accidental 'events from impacting the
federal agency, three state agencies, and two Contra Costa Canal and Contra Costa Water
local agencies. The issues and concerns District water supply services.
expressed by the agencies are summarized
below. Hazardous Material sVaste. The EA should
identift, the Station's hazardous materials
• Air Qualit.v. EPA has promulgated storage', disposal, and contamination history
regulations at 58 Federal Register 63214 as it relates to the siting of the proposed rail
(November 30, 1993) implementing and truck explosive holding yard. The EA
Section 176(c) of the Clean Au, Act. These should include descriptions of proposed
regulations establish de minimis levels for efforts to remove hazardous waste and
actions requiring conformity contamination from the site.
determinations, exempt certain actions
from conformity determinations, and Public Health and Safety. The EA should
create criteria and procedures that federal address emergency response capabilities and
agencies must follow for actions required plans that would be employed in the event of
to have conformity determinations. These an accident. The EA should identify any
regulations and their applicability should changes to previously established explosive
be discussed in the EA. safety zones.
• Wetlands and Water Qualitv. The EA Land Use. The EA should address how the
should consider alternatives that will proposed action would affect a potential
preserve wetland resources. The EA future use of the site for port or water-related
should include maps, text, and tables that industrial purposes.
feature areas occupied by wetlands,
aquatic systems, and non-wetland riparian These conu-nents were taken into consideration
habitat. Direct, indirect, and cumulative in the preparation of this Environmental
impacts to these resources should be fully Assessment.
described in the EA. The EA should
clearly delineate all areas of tidal action,
all tidal marshes, and non-tidal wetlands
that may be affected by the proposed
action. The EA should ensure that the
proposed action will not affect the
Department of Defense's obligation to meet
water quality standards.
K11103-H 5
Scoping Process
This page left intentionally blank.
i
1
1
1
K37303-H 6
3.0 ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION
3.1 CRITERIA FOR amount of ammunition processed through the
ALTERNATIVE SELECTION station would remain the same.
The following criteria were used to select The proposed containerization project would
project alternatives: involve construction at two locations in the tidal
area: Pier 3 on Suisun Bay, and in the westerly
• Maximize the use of existing military portion of the tidal area along Port Chicago
facilities, particularly underutilized Highway (Figure 3-1).
facilities or those becoming available as a
result of the military drawdown and base Pier 3 would be upgraded to support two 40-ton
realignment and closure actions. capacity container cranes. The loading area of
the pier is approximately 1,200 feet long and
• Provide adequate storage capability and 95 feet wide. To provide structural support and
rail-to-port access. operating clearance for the container cranes, the
concrete deck would be extended 15 feet and a
• Minimize the effect on current operations crane rail beam would be added along the
at the port whenever possible. channel side of the pier, and a crane rail beam
would be added along the land side of the pier.
• Provide pier facilities with adequate net The electrically powered container cranes would
explosive weight capability require about 1,500 kVA. Sufficient capacity can
be furnished via the existing Navy 12 kV feeder
• Provide flexibility, expansion capability, at Pier 4. Pier lighting now comprises two rows
and the least restricted operational of 25-foot-high poles. Because these poles would
environment. interfere with container crane operations, they
would be replaced with a single row of poles
Several West Coast port facilities were behind the new land-side crane rail beam. The
considered for the containerization project, crane rails would be bonded and grounded. The
including Coos Bay, Oregon;Eureka, existing fender system, utility stanchions, and
California, Gray's Harbor,Washington; mooring fittings would need to be removed and
Long Beach, California;Port Angeles, replaced in conjunction with the deck extension.
Washington;Port Hueneme, California; A schematic cross section of the proposed pier
Port Westward, Oregon; and Seal Beach, improvements is shown on Figure 3-2.
California. After a review of available studies
® these facilities were found to have low A rail and truck explosives holding yard and
® ammunition net explosive weight (NEW) railcar loading docks and interchange would be
capabilities, and thus were dismissed due to constructed on the former Port Chicago townsite
potential public health and explosive safety in the land area bounded by Port Chicago
impacts._ NWS Concord was the only facility Highway to the south, public rail lines to the
on the West Coast to meet all these criteria. north and west, and an ordnance facility to the
east. The holding yard would be able to
3.2 DESCRIPTION OF accommodate eight barricaded rail/truck
PROPOSED ACTION container holding pads with a total capacity of
286 containers. The typical holding pad would
NWS Concord has been assigned the be 290 feet long and 66 feet wide, with room for
responsibility of providing an outload container"top loader"maneuvering when trucks
capability of 520 containers a day for 8 days. drive through to drop off or pick up containers.
With the proposed improvements,the rate at The holding pads would be constructed with a
which containerized ammunition could be concrete retaining wall on the interior face and
processed would increase; however, the total
K37303-H 7
Suisun Bay
- —_
- -
. _- munition..
mm u ro
_ _
..... . ::.....
:
_ =-
_ ......
_ - -- _
. .
--
_..._...._ .....
_ -
Rai nterchange Yard
_ -
En
_
:
ope
eint_
=
__
=_- -
- -
_ - _- -
R d
a�\�
_
-_..._ -
_:_ -
_ So_ _. Fe-:; - -_ RauF-_and Truck _...
._ �o= _ EX lose:- _Card ..
tual.
-::::
NP
-
::.......:
am..:
0
5:= : : . _._--;.-:_;:_:..:. - Ch-ica o -Highway
::;.,.. ........:_.._--..:_—_::.. ....:_: _:::..........................•.. ........ ........................._..._...... .. ..___•..........:.:::::•........ _ - —
°. : = '..:•= ........_.._...-:_ .......... .......................... . . Closed
...:....
.........................
__-_. - - -_
_ - :-
- —
— _-
o _
N
0 1500 3000 Naval Weapons Station Concord
mmmmmmll Containerization Project
SCALE IN FEET Figure 3-1 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN =r
8
HINGED
BOOM IN STOWED
POSITION
01,ri
HIGH MAST FLOODLIGHTING POLES
U S NAVY
LA,N:
P A AMAX CONTAINER�
V L-SSEL
L
' \ I I I
-7 C A T-VV'4'-K(
AC(1,ES S F-1II
H
60'± 92'-9" 151
EXIST. PIER
30' - 100' 1 125' OUTREACH
NEW PIERHEAD LINE
BAC K R EAC H FACE OF PIER
EXTENDED PIER DECK
SECTION
Naval Weapons Station Concord
to C3
a,
Containerization Project C�
Figure 3-2 SCHEMATIC CROSS-SECTION OF 8ru
�m
AMMUNITION PIER CONTAINER CRANE 02
Ima,
CU
9
Alternatives Including P the Proposed Action
an earthen barricade on the exterior face selected harbor crane operating locations. The
(Figure 3-3). aprons at either end of the wharf would be '
strengthened to support. the harbor cranes when
Railcar loading docks with a total capacity of not in use. These mobile harbor cranes would be
sixteen 90-foot flat cars or four 305-foot multi-purpose cargo handling cranes that feature
"double-stack" articulated cars would be an elevated boom hinge, approximately 40 feet '
constructed. Four separate docks would above ground, mounted on a tower. Each crane's
permit efficient train-to-truck transfer of capacity would allow it to lift a maximum of
containers using "top loaders" (same as for the 40,000 pounds at a maximum operating radius of '
holding pads). An interchange yard with a 115 feet; while the lifting of 80,000-pound
capacity for thirty-six 90-foot flat cars would containers would be restricted to a 75-foot
be constructed to facilitate railcar receiving radius.
and inspection. The interchange yard would
consist of two sets of newly constructed All-earthen barricades would be constructed for
parallel tracks approximately 3,000 feet long each holding pad with a required 2 (horizontal)
entirely within the existing Union Pacific (UP) to 1 (vertical) slope on both the interior and '
Railroad tracks right-of-way. The project exterior faces. Each holding pad would be
would include site lighting, electrical . approximately twice as wide as the holding pads
distribution, fencing, drainage, landscaping, associated with the proposed action.
access roads, trackwork, and relocation of
electric and water transmission lines. The rail interchange yard would consist of three
sets of newly constructed parallel tracks
3.3 DESCRIPTION OF NO approximately 2,500 feet long. These tracks
ACTION would parallel the existing UP tracks on the
south and east and would merge into the UP
Under the no action alternative, NWS Concord tracks approximately 350 feet west of Main.
would retain the capacity to load Street.
240 containers per day, using a combination of
ship's gear, floating cranes, and trunk cranes After preliminary assessment of this alternative,
and the existing holding areas at Pier 2. Break it. was eliminated from further consideration for
bulk operations would continue to be the following reasons: Upgrading Piers 2 and 3
compromised at Piers 2 and 3 to achieve this would create more impacts to the aquatic
capacity. One of the primary objectives of the environment than would upgrading Pier 3 alone; ,
Station Master Plan would not be achieved, constructing all-earthen holding pad barricades
rendering the Station's new mission infeasible. would cover a larger area than the proposed
action and necessitate the movement of a ,
3.4 ALTERNATIVES significant amount of earth; and construction of
CONSIDERED BUT NOT the rail interchange yard south and east of the
BROUGHT FORWARD IN UP right-of-way would affect a wetlands area.
THIS DOCUMENT FOR ,
DETAILED ANALYSIS
One other alternative at NWS Concord was
considered. Under this alternative, Piers 2 and
3 would be upgraded to accommodate six
harbor cranes, holding pad barricades would
be constructed using.earth only, instead of
concrete and earth, and the rail interchange
yard would be built south and east of the UP
right-of-way. Piers 2 and 3 would be
upgraded by widening the existing raised
loading platforms on the channel side by
17 feet and strengthening the platforms at the '
K37303-H 10
a
a
66'
RvAG
Con air,ers RACK
r
14 a
O f O
T
op Leader ,)n aadI Tru-:-
within typical holding pad
Naval Weapons Station Concord o
Containerization Project
Figure 3-3 SCHEMATIC CROSS—SECTION OF
TYPICAL RAILROAD/TRUCK EXPLOSIVES HOLDING PAD
Alternatives Including the Proposed Action
This page left intentionally blank.
K37303-H 12
4.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
The following analysis focuses on those 1,571 of which make up the six islands offshore
resources that could receive significant of the main area. Most all of the facilities within
impacts from the proposed actions. As a the area are on the original property of Naval
result, some areas and issues are addressed in Magazine, Port Chicago. All but a few hundred
greater detail than others to assure that acres are covered by explosive safety quantity
adequate attention is focused on the most distance (ESQD) arcs and are undeveloped.
relevant issues. The discussions of the
affected environment for these resources have Because the proposed containerization project
been developed in a level of detail would involve construction only within the tidal
commensurate with the significance of the area, the following discussions focus on the tidal
potential impact. area.
The Naval Weapons Station Concord (Station) 4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
consists of nearly 13,000 acres (about
22 square miles) on Suisun Bav and in the Biological resources on and in the immediate
northwest portion of the city of Concord. The vicinity of the project site (i.e., study area) are
mainland portion of the Station is in north- described in this section. Descriptions are based
central Contra Costa County, California.: most on the following:
of the offshore/island portion is in Solano
Couniv, The Station is approximately 4 miles 0 Database queries (DFG, 1994; Skinner and
east of the city of Martinez and immediately Pavlik, 1994)
west of the city of Pittsburg and the
unincorporated communities of Shore Acres, * Relevant biological literature (Hickman, 1993:
Ambrose, and West Pittsburg (Figure 1-1). DFG, 1988, 1990a, 1990b)
The Station is devoted primarily to the receipt. 9 Biological studies conducted on the Naval
segregation, storage, and shipment of Weapons Station, Concord (14ESTDIV, 1989:
ammunition, and to the maintenance and JSA. 1983; HSA, 1986)
quality control support for assigned explosives
and weapons systems. The Station serves as 0 Correspondence with the U.S. Fish and
the home port far six ammunition ships and Wildlife Service (Medlin, 1994)
other fleet units assigned to the San Francisco
Bav Area, and is the major ammunition a Field reconnaissance (HLA, 1994.).
transshipment terminal on the West Coast.
4.1.1 Setting
The Station consists of three landholdings:
the tidal area north of the city of Concord, the NWS Concord is along the south shore of
inland area within the corporate limits of Suisun Bay approximately 10 miles west of the
Concord, and a radiography facility at confluence, of the Sacramento and San Joaquin
Pittsburg. The tidal and inland areas are rivers. The proposed project area consists of
linked by a narrow Navy-owned rail and road two areas within the tidal portion of the Station.
corridor. The proposed containerization One is historic Port Chicago, a former town
project would be located wholly withi:u the (i.e., townsite) bordered to the north by Union
tidal area. Pacific Railroad tracks, to the east by a field, to
the south by an unnamed northwest-trending
The tidal area is the center of offloading and ridge and Contra Costa Canal, and to the west by
offloading operations. This area consists of Hastings Marsh. The townsite is approximately
7,648 acres of land, 6..077 of which make up 5 miles east of Martinez, 1 mile south of
the mainland adjacent to Suisun Bay, and Suisun Bay, and 3/4 mile north of Clyde. The
K37303-H 13
Affected Environment
townsite contains non-native grassland, grassland include California vole (Microtus
ruderal (disturbed). eucalyptus woodland, and californicus), deer mouse (Peromyscus '
seasonal wetland habitats, and a pond. A maniculatus), slender salamander (Batrachoseps
network of asphalt roadways and the Port pocificus), and meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta).
Chicago Highway dissect the site. The second Adjacent communities include eucalyptus grove ,
portion of the project area is Pier 3, which and ruderal communities. Habitat features of
rests on pilings in Suisun Bay (pier area). these communities increase the overall diversity
Brackish marsh occurs along the shoreline of habitat types and provide for additional
approximately 500 feet to the south and animal species to use the non-native grassland '
several islands, including Seal Island, Roe community. Red-tailed hawk (Buteo
Island, Ryer Island, Freeman Island, Snag jamaicensis), American kestrel (Falco sparverius),
Island, and Middle Ground Island, occur and striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis) forage for ,
offshore in Suisun Bay. prey within the non-native grassland community.
A memorandum of understanding between the Ruderal. Ruderal communities are assemblages
Department of the Navy and the U.S. Fish and of plants that thrive in waste areas, roadsides, ,
Wildlife Service established a wetland and similar disturbed sites in towns and cities
preserve composed of the six offshore islands (Holland, 1986). This community occupies most
mentioned above and five mainland marshes: of the historic townsite and is dominated by non- ,
Hastings Marsh, North Area K, Pier Marsh, native herbs and specimen trees (Figure 4.1-1).
Middle Point Marsh, and East Marsh (1VPNSTA This community is typified by species that are
Concord and FINS, 1984). found in antlu•opogenic areas such as fennel, '
yellow star-thistle (Centourea solstitiolis),
4.1.2 Terrestrial Environment Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), black
mustard, foxtail barlev, redstem filaree (Erodium
This section describes the biological cicutarium), and spring vetch (Vicio sativa ,
communities associated with the terrestrial sativa). In addition, approximately 2 percent of
enviu•onment of the study area. Characteristic the ruderal community is occupied by
plant and animal species are identified below historically planted street trees. Trees
and the potential occurrence of special status interspersed in the ruderal community, such as
species is described in Table B-1, Appendix B. olive (Olea europea), Arizona cypress (Cupressus
a. arizonico), Lombardy poplar (Populus nigra
Non-Native Grassland. Non-native grassland 'italica'), Peruvian pepper tree (Schinus molle),
is an annual vegetative community that and silver wattle (Acacia dealbata), occur along
develops typically on fine-textured, usually the edges of old streets and within vacant lots.
clay soil (Holland, 1986). This community ,
occurs outside of the historic townsite The variation of plant species types and spatial
(Figure 4.1-1) and is dominated by non-native patterns provides habitat for a variety of wildlife
grasses and broad-leaf herbs that have been species. Characteristic species in this habitat are
grazed by cattle to heights ranging from 0 to 6 considered to be generalists, capable of using
inches. Typified by species that occur on disturbed habitats. Animal species observed in
grazed lands, this community supports wild the field that are representative of this
oat (Avena fatuo), foxtail barley (Hordeum community include California ground squirrel
murinum leporinum), summer lupine (Lupinus (Spermopklus beecheyi), northern mockingbird
formosus formosus), black mustard (Brassica (Mimus polyglottos), killdeer (Charadrius
nigra), broad-leaf filaree (Erodium botrys), vociferus), and European starling (Sturnus '
fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), and ripgut grass vulgaris).
(Bromus diandrus).
Eucalyptus Grove. The townsite supports two
The non-native grassland provides forage and eucalyptus groves that were planted as
or cover for a variety of small mammals, birds, windrows: one in the northeast and another in
reptiles, and amphibians. Characteristic the southwest (Figure 4.1-1) These groves are
species that were observed in the open composed solely of blue gum (Eucalyptus '
K37303-H 14
c�
z CL
a
o w O
z
J a O o F-
N w z N VO Z
a w DLLI c
Of m L� O
Of
c� w U
w � cn a p p
Q w � � W o aVi U
z
_
Q a z aQ. a m� d ° z
-� w I o z a o �a _ o z in a
EL
o 0 0 D � a Z Z� o ., N c
w z a o w cn - c .0 _
w o ti D- I
+ OOO Wo � i
\ D 000 aZ a� d
0001 OQ 3 C
+ D 000 Z�_ijJ
Z U Li
N
J,
r
b'
C7
uj
N
/ !
r
LLJ
LLJ
cy-
LLJ
70
J/i
If
i 1J
" a
/ 1 ,17
y rr t I o -Q,co
\ \\ +Y
co
J - - ----- _ - -- _ --
(/ ,•' �t - o-�-y---=-� =Lam_- ...��_-- ._:_� �_-:�,,\\ ;y\�, �, '\ \t i��v. \ $1�
< ' JIN., d
!
\
N.
"ITy -\'-
{
f ' T. Y to i \'� ; ••,; � ,` 1y``G 01J`�. O n,` \\-\�, �-', - ., -- \
I :
yr. ` \ \
u.,� + •0a I?-_-...._----(yam, ,'--\Qs �`. �, \ 1 J, i ri .,1, `• ���yl'� �y�.y,yy \ \\ \\ _ �;('" 't<-` ,'�
C11',ti i. ,\A � \\ly s`� ,\�\y\ � .....\ y ylJ `w, �.._ '�• `,1.�'yxi\1�y°Q,i,C�, \y \ � l\\
i I-- '` --- tib•--------- ----- \._..._ \y -.�� 1 \\ -� • . - \1
(-' ` � `=..✓j/ice ;Y ""_-+... '_
`
11 2111'8090966I
0'0001 20019862
This Page Leff
Intentionally Blank
Affected Environment
globulus), with a sparse understory comprising approximate locations and dimensions of the
a few grasses and forbs common to the ponds are depicted on Figure 4.1-1. These
adjoining non-native grassland and ruderal wetlands.support plants adapted to elevated
habitats. Fallen branches, bark, leaves. and moisture levels and vary in species composition
fruits litter the ground beneath the trees. with respect to the duration of inundation.
Characteristic animal species of this Plants that typify these wetlands include narrow-
community use the trees and/or litter for leaved cattail, bulrush, and brass-buttons (Colula
foraging, cover, and/or nesting habitat. coronopijblia); areas transitional to uplands
Representative animal species observed in the support annual beard grass (Potypogon
field include dark-eyed junco (Junco hi,emahs), monspeliensis), Italian ryegrass (Lolium
velloxv-rumped warbler (Dendroica cor'onala), multiflorum), bristly ox-tongue (Picris echioides),
Anna's hummingbird (Ca4yTte anna), red- and fiddle dock (Rumexpulcher).
tailed hawk, and great horned owl (Bubo
virginianus). A large raptor nest constructed Brackish Marsh. Extensive brackish marsh
of sticks and twigs, which is consistent with habitat occurs along the Suisun Bay margin in
red-tailed hawk construction, was observed the vicinity of Pier 3. This habitat does not
approximately 70 feet above the ground in a occur on the proposed project area and is not
blue gum in the northeast corner of the site. expected to be either directly or indirectly
affected by the project.
4.1.3 Wetiand Environment
4.1.4 Aquatic Environment
This section describes the biological
communities associated with the wetland This section describes the biological communities
environment of the study area. Characteristic associated with the aquatic environment of the
plant and animal species are identified below study area, that is the bay waters along the south
and the potential for occurrence of special shoreline of Suisun Bay near Pier 3. Suisun Bay
status wetland'species is evaluated in Table B- is characterized by estuarine conditions with
1. The approximate locations and dimensions species composition and abundance largely
of wetland areas are. depicted on Figure 4.1-1. determined by the interaction of river currents
and tidal waters flowing through the Golden
Gate. Seasonal and yearly variations in the
Ponds. A pond measuring approximately salinity of estuary waters greatly influence the
2 acres along the northern boundary of the site dynamics of biological populations in this
occurs in a topographic lowland that receives environment, as do human influences such as
runoff from the toxviasite area. This pond diking and filling and the introduction of non-
consists of open water with emergent wetland native species. Changes in freshwater currents,.
vegetation. Typical plants of this community tidal flows, and winds also affect the
C'
include bulrush and narrow-leaved cattail composition and abundance of biological
(7:vpha angustijbljo) in areas with standing populations in the project area on a daily,
water, and picklegrass (DnTsjs alopecuroides)i seasonal, and yearly basis. Aquatic communities
spear oracle (Atriplexpatula), and Bermuda associated with the estuarine environment of the
grass (Cynodon doctIllon) along the banks. project site are described below.
This community provides cover, forage,
nesting/roosting'habitat, and water for Benthic Community. The benthic community
drinking and bathing to a variety of wildlife. occupies the surface and subsurface soft-bottom
Representative animal species that utilize this benthos of the estuary. Species composition and
community include red-winged blackbird, distribution of benthic invertebrates are most
snipe (Gaffinago gallinago), mallard (Arras significantly influenced by seasonal variations in
platvrhyncus), Pacific treefrog (Hylaregilla), salinity; in general, diversity increases in more
and coyote. saline environments. The benthos in estuarine
environments typical of Suisun Bay is dominated
Several seasonal ponds occur within the by a few species tolerant of wide variations in
townsite portion of the project area. The salinity. Fewer than 10 permanent
KIIIOI,H 17
Affected Environment '
macroinvertebrate species inhabit Suisun Bay turbulence. Biological communities associated
because of seasonal changes in salinity. with pilings are primary producers such as '
micro- and macroalgae, filter-feeding and
Fish Community. Estuarine fish species are suspension-feeding invertebrates such as
those that use the brackish water portions of barnacles that consume phytoplankton from the '
the estuary such as Suisun Bay. water column, and a variety of predators. Algae-
Representative species of this community and invertebrates form a food base for pelagic
include starry flounder (Platichthys stellatus), fish during high tides when pilings are inundated
staghorn sculpin (Leptocottus armatus), Delta and for shorebirds during low tides when pilings '
smelt (41Pomesus transpacificus), and longfin are exposed.
smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys). Anadromous
fish species may also be present in Suisun 4.1.5 Special-Status Species '
Bay; Anadromous fish species are those that
spend most of their adult lives in the Pacific Habitats within and in the immediate vicinity of
Ocean and migrate through the bay and Delta the project area provide conditions suitable for
to the freshwater channels of the Sacramento- some special-status species that are reported to
San Joaquin system to spawn. Anadromous occur near the area. Table 4.1-1 provides a list
fish species occurring in the Bay-Delta include of federal- or state-listed special status species
chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshaKi tscha), that are known or have a reasonable expectation
striped bass (Roccus saxotilis). American shad of occurring in the project area. This list is a
(Alosa sapidissima), white sturgeon, and green subset of Table B-1, Appendix B which is a
sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris). much longer list of species that may occru• in the
region.
Estuarine/Marine Birds and Mammals.
Shorebirds, waterfowl, and diving birds forage 4.2 CULTURAL RESOURCES
in the open-water and intertidal habitats of the '
study area. The vast majority of birds whose Cultural resources include prehistoric and
ranges include the stud}, area are migratory. historic archaeological sites, historic architectural
Their presence in the open-water and and engineering remains, and sites of traditional '
intertidal portions of project area is expected value or religious importance to Native
to be limited to occasional roosting or Americans or other ethnic groups. This section
foraging. Characteristic species include summarizes the prehistory. enthography, and
mallard (Areas pla4 rhvnchos). double-crested history relative to the project area and is taken
cormorant (Phalacrocorax ouritis), and great from a cultural resources review for the
blue heron (Ardea herodias). Mammals known Containerization Project (Basin Research
to occur, in the adjacent areas that are Associates. Inc. 1995), which is included as '
characteristic of the estuarine/marine Appendix C.
environment include harbor seal (Phoca
vitulina) and California sea lion (Zalophus 4.2.1 Background
calijbrnicus). These animals forage primarily
in open water and use terrestrial habitats for Self et al. (1993) conducted a cultural resources
resting and giving birth. overview of NWS Concord. This document
provides (1) a brief archaeological and historical
Pilings. Pilings and piers present in the context for NWS Concord; (2) an archaeological
intertidal zones along the shoreline of the sensitivity map showing areas of previous
study area may be colonized by algae and archaeological surveys, known sites, and
invertebrates that settle out of the water locations where cultural resources might exist;
column onto exposed substrates. Factors (3) completed State of California Historic
affecting the types and abundance of species Resources Inventory Formers for all pre-1946
colonizing these substrates include salinity, structures; and, (4) a map showing the locations
substrate type (e.g., wood, concrete), of buildings and structures that appear to qualify
concentration of suspended sediment, level of for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
tidal inundation, and intensity of water Places (NRHP). ,
K37303-H 1 S
pG y cC ,••+ r C
cs -^ ^C
•= v r
r 7
r� r
9 r
-0 c U
'a tT OS
i O G
C � y vcod cs
1
Q. V 7' C 7 C
1 y f c W >
dC►.
a.
t!
f
CC
^^
cc� CC
V y
�. r
ccc M ct C:
v
aG �
o
i
tt, r ct_ .i T s ,
10,
CD
v ,,'�„ 1 � r � ICG '� � �, r ^.. ,i .•
v. G G •- ti
c � v� r c •% � G� � C :!: cG
r
�" r G: 'C r' �,,, '✓r, 1. „ C i "� ,� rrr'"
v
ts
d 0 00
N
N
d 0 i
ciiN d r`= 't
Q1
t S o v v
a• 7 ��
c �v C- G �
CC
J C ti
r
t j,
CID
Y
J i
CS G
rZ t
1
I
v:v
IAO
y
r c c - a .!Zcr
tx v c
7 L V " CL
C C U r G G ? L SOr '^
v v Jet U ✓'
r v .
N � ... - v � V 3 c H 3 •r r ce
QS � ` T — � � � ► r � to
1 40 ,
N
v
J
d i p Q C:
mC3 C3 ,f
d 0 ?„► C v '
d
N Z ° •°,
c
O. c
c
r;
c $
d
cc
cz
N
r
V r
C
V
f
2�
r
r
r
c �
O
R j,
M Ln
tr
! !
C ^ T ^ .f r •'..� •..'S
= t0
dao `
¢TO 0L) J ^ 1,
N wU tJ:
ftr
r -,
(,.tr-
G ,
U -C
@ - 0 OCL U
cs
vm r V eo C u
U? Z' •r. L � OD r ,... C .�. ,,. ,w
CIL 7"
r. S%
ViT •t. ..� C'. f
tr
�-
22
CS
r Cr
r
s i
5i C:
tc
ct
� v
•7 G-' r "C
i d T
r 2C i V. Y- •�i
v
-00
oo
'� � � ;) •v ,T � G � rte' ..
r
Cil C:i � v: nr,,: � �•' :i ►� i
c? t:
0 .0oU
G G CCs
N G C y
♦� G
It's
G
WO
y � � � �, �` � .. r ".- r✓ Vtr,
GrCc
'r
CL ` r CG rte-= ►� r� V.
ct
it
Sh
r-,
W v ^ 1. ? t
`� J G
v
J
v
Qy r I
r
io
J.
t0 F .G ?•
G C
G o w v x
d � N
r .- ..
,04
A
N
-r Y �v
7 I
i
U r � : 2 m F '� �• v;
N a G 3;
.r :• r G f r _ 3
N f C
i
J
y
r• r •, r
r
' Affected Environment
4.2.2 Prehistory The Bay Miwok followed a flexible gathering and
hunting strategy based on the seasonal
Regional prehistory was characterized by Self availability of resources. The Delta area with its
et al. (1993) using the tlu•ee-part scheme waterways and marshy areas and interior valleys
generally recognized for central California. with their riparian and foothill resource zones
Periods are defined by the presence/absence of would have provided a large variety of vegetal
select artifact types and ecofacts. The and faunal resources along with the raw
Windmiller Pattern (4,500 to 2,500 years materials necessary for daily life. Villages appear
before present [BP]; former Early Horizon) is to have been established on natural mounds to
' the oldest, followed by the Berkeley Pattern elevate living areas during periods of seasonal
(2,500 to 1,500 years BP; former Middle; flooding and rainfall. Outlying camps were
Horizon) and the Late Prehistoric Period established away from the villages during the
(Augustine Pattern) (1,500 to 150 years BP: seasonal round of resource exploitation.
former Late Horizon). Changing subsistence Ethnographic data and historical observations
patterns and behavioral changes through time suggest the importance of ritual and ceremony in
have been inferred based on the study of Miwok daily life that is supported by
cultural materials from each period. archaeological data.
Chronological boundaries are supported by
stratigraphic analysis and radiometric and No Native American villages or known trails are
obsidian hvdi•ation dating. situated within or adjacent to the project area.
Few prehistoric cultural resources are present 4.2.4 History
within NWS Concord (Self'et o1., 1993) and no
prehistoric archaeological sites have been The historic era began with the Hispanic Period.
recorded in or adjacent to the proposed project After an initial period of exploration, the Spanish
area. A summary of known cultural resources concentrated on founding presidios, missions,
i and studies within 1 mile of NWS Concord is and secular towns; land was held by the Crown
presented in Self et al. (1993). (1769-1821). In contrast, the Mexican
government stressed individual ownership of the
' 4.2.3. Ethnography land (,vle, 1990: 463). The project area is
situated in an ungranted area west of Rancho .
The proposed project area is within the Monte Diablo and east of Rancho Los Medanos
ethnographic and historic boundaries of the (Hendry and Botiman, 1940: map; Beck and
Native American group known as the Bay Haase, 1974: #30).
Miwok or• Scalan, which occupied the area
' from Walnut Creek east to the Sacramento- The American Period was marked by growth in
San Joaquin Delta. The closest known the general study area linked with agriculttuue, a
ethnographic village is that of the Julpun coal mining boom from the 1850s tluough the.
tribelet' (Bennvhofj; 1977: Map 2), 1880s, and the development of transportation alternatively known as the Chupcan, which networks to provide market links for industry
was east of the proposed project area near and agriculture. The Contra Costa County towns
present-day Antioch (Levy, 1978: 398-399, of Port Costa, Crockett, Vallejo Junction,
Fig. 1; Kroeber, 1925). The Chupcan occupied Martinez. Bay Point, Pittsburg, and Antioch,
the area between Port Chicago and the mouth among others, were important focal points for
of Marsh Creek (i.e... Oakley area). The village services and for transporting coal, fish, lumber.
of Chupan was first located by the Fages and and wheat to San Francisco, Sacramento, and
Crespi expedition of 1772 and was revisited by beyond by water and, later; by rail
Anza's second expedition in 1776. Father Fray (Goddard, 1857; Gudde, 1974; Emanuels, 1986).
Ramon Abella also passed through the Seal Bluff Landing, located opposite Seal Island
Chupunes area on his way into the Delta in on Suisun Bay, was the first suitable location
1811 (Bennyhoff, 1977: 140, after Cook. 1957: east of Martinez with sufficient depth for the
145-146). passage and docking of steam powered ships
even at low tide.
K37303-H 25
Affected Environment
Bay Point. located east of Seal Bluff Landing, A series of explosions on July 17, 1944, on the
had a post office by May 1901 and was at.the ammunition loading dock at Pier 1 killed
junction of a north-south road linking Seal 322 men and injured 390 and destroyed two
Bluff Landing with Willow Pass north of ships, the S.S. Quinols Victory and S.S.
Concord and the Southern Pacific and E.A. Bryan. Much of the tidal area and all of the
San Francisco and San Joaquin Railroad tracks piers were destroyed, as were a diesel locomotive
(USGS. 1901; Frickstad, 1955: 20, 23).
and all cars on the pier. Practically every
building and structure at NWS Concord
In November 1907, C.A. Smith of the sustained some damage.
C.A. Smith Lumber Company purchased 1,500
acres in and around Seal'Bluff from the heirs Although the explosion caused no deaths in the
of Daniel Cunningham and E.A. Nealy. At town of Port Chicago, 109 residents were injured
this time, there was a post office, a grain and most of the 660 homes and all of the 27
warehouse, a ranch house, a saloon and a storesibusinesses were damaged. The blast was
general store (Collier. 1983: 142). By January felt throughout the area and heard as far away as
1908, the C.A. Smith Lumber Company at Bay San Francisco and Sacramento.
Point was the largest woodworking operation
in the United States, with approximately 2,000 As a result of this disaster, a 2-mile safety zone
employees. The company was rebuilt in 1915 around the piers was proposed and debated
after a 1913 fire and in 1917, the company bitterly for decades (e.g.,Anonymous, 1956;
reorganized as the "Coos Bay Lumber Smitten, 1955, 1958). In October 1967, Congress
Company." It moved to Oakland in 1932 after passed Public Law 90-110 authorizing the
another fire (Collier, 1983: 143; purchase of land to provide an explosive safety
Emanuels, 1986: 15; Selj'et al., 1993: Table 1). zone (HGHB, 1989: 3-2). By January 1969, the
The Coos Bay Lumber Company Warehouse, purchase of 550 of the 775 parcels had been
constructed in 1916, still exists 'at NWS negotiated. Some houses were moved to nearby
Concord (Bldg A3) (Selj'et al., 1993: 194). In Clyde, Nichols, and Shore Acres (east of
August 1908. Smith filed a township map for Nichols). The protracted closure led to
"The City of Bay Point" with the County opportunistic dumping in the town by other
Recorder (Miller ca., 1908-1909). This city Contra Costa residents, resulting in,a rat
was to become Port Chicago. problem. This material was not cleared
immediately because the Navy had "promised
Bay Point, despite its "boom and bust" cycles. salvage rights" to the residents and the over
retained a population of about 1,000 between 350 homes not moved were to be left intact until
1908 and 1930 and was renamed Port Chicago litigation on the final property settlement was
on October 31, 1931. The Bay Point post completed. The bulldozer razing of the town
office was officially renamed Port Chicago on required two to three months and did not result
November 1, 1931 (Frickstad, 1955: 20: in the removal of all streets, sidewalks, or
Collier, 1983: 144). utilities. The Bay Point Elementary School,
Veterans Hall (library and City Hail). firehouse,
The United States Naval Magazine at Port and Open Bible Church were not demolished and
Chicago was established on Janu'ary 27, 1942, the latter was moved in February 1970. The last
on 630 acres formerly occupied by the Coos resident left by December 20, 1969,
Bay Lumber Company and Copper King
Smelter Company. In contrast to the fewer The facility is also the site of the Port Chicago
than 1,000 residents of Port Chicago, NWS National Memorial, designating the facility for
Concord had a personnel complement of ". . . the critical role . . . played in the Second
approximately 4,000 men. By 1944, the World War . . . and the historic importance of the
facility included nearly 7,000 acres and was explosion which occurred at the Port Chicago
the principal Pacific Coast loading and storage Naval Magazine on July 17, 1944." (PL 102-562).
point for ammunition. The memorial monument lists the names of those
who died at the site of the explosion and is open
to the public 1 day per year.
K37303-H 26
Affected Environment
4.2.5 Project Activity Area Site as eligible for the NRNP (see Self el al., 1993). in
Summary addition, no Native American, African American,
soci o demographic, or socioeconomic districts or
Existing archival data, including the results of features of significance have been identified in or
a prehistoric and historic site record and adjacent to the proposed project area,
literature search by the Northwest Information
Center, Historical Resources Information 4.3 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND
System, were reviewed to identify cultural SEISMICITY
properties within the project area. Few
prehistoric cultural resources are present 4.3.1 Geology
within NIVS Concord (Sell I et W., 1993), and
no prehistoric archaeological sites have been The project site is underlain by Quatemary-age
recorded in or adjacent to the proposed fluvial and alluvial deposits to depths of
project. No Native American villages or approximately 800 feet. The alluvium is
known trails are within the project area. No comprised of erosional deposits from the hills to
historic sites associated with the Hispanic the south and consists of unconsolidated silts,
period are known and no early American sandy silts,, and sandy clays which grade to sand
period sites are expected. and gravel at depth. A younger alluvium and
fluvial deposit consisting of primarily clay and
Pier 3 is in an area of low archaeological silt with some sandy silts lies above the older
sensitivity. The submerged areas adjacent to sediments. Bedrock units beneath the alluvium
Piers 2 through 4 have been subjected to consist of Tertiary age sedimentary and volcanic
maintenance dredging approximately every 7 rocks comprise sandstones, shales, conglomerates
to 8 years to maintain adequate depth for and volcanic tuffs which display a pronounced
shipping operations (ATT47S Concord, 1987). northwest structural fabric resulting from seismic
The discovery of significant submerg'e*'d activity from the Cenozoic to the present.
cultural resource is not expected as a result of
previous dredging operations alongside Pier 3. 4.3.2 Solis
The town of Port Chicago and its periphery are Two soil associations predominate at NWS
within an area of archaeological sensitivity Concord. The tidal wetland area is composed of
(see Historic Resources Site Map in Se1j"et muck soils of the Joice-Reyes association. These
W., 1993). Household and other objects on the muck soils are very deep, poorly drained., and
ground surface were observed by Self et al. consist of saline mucks and silty clays, They
(1993: 17) during a cursorN, survey of the formed in saltwater marshes from hydrophy-tic
original neighborhoods" of Port Chicago. plant material and fine-textured mineral alluvium
However, no sites, structures, either from mixed parent rocks. Joice mucks form
individually or as part of a district, were nearly level wetland subject to saltwater
identified as eligible for the National Register inundation, especially during high tides.
of Historic Places. although the NRHP Because of their poor drainage, these soils are
evaluation of the former town of Port Chicago also subject to freshwater flooding and ponding
was not addressed by Self et al. (1993: 19-20). after heavy precipitation and surface runoff from
adjacent uplands.
The results of an archaeological field
review/inventory conducted November 29 and The inland area and uplands in the tidal area are
December 8, 1994, found no indicators of composed primarily of soils belonging to the
prehistoric or significant subsurface historic Altamont Diablo-Fontana association. The soils
archaeological sites. Remnants of the former in this association are moderately deep to deep.
town of Bay Point/Port Chicago (ca. 1908 to They formed in material weathered from soft,
1969) are present, but lack significance and fine-grained sandstones and shales. This
integrity and none of the architectural association is composed of varying percentages of
resources located within or formerly within Altamont clay and Fontana silty clay loam,
the town of Port Chicago have been identified depending upon the slope. Steeper slopes (50 to
K37303-H 27
Affected Environment
70 percent) have a larger percentage of movement include the Hayward and Calaveras
Fontana silty clay loams. Where the soils are faults. The Hayward Fault is creeping in several
bare, runoff is medium to rapid (depending on locations and was the source of severe
slope) and the erosion hazard is moderate to earthquakes in 1836 and 1868. Since 1934,
high. nearly 200 earthquakes have been recorded in
central Contra Costa County. Ten of these had
The predominant soil types found in the magnitudes ranging from 4.0 to 5.4 on the
project area and their suitability for the Richter scale. Faults in the county that are
development are presented below. considered to be active by the U.S. Geological
Survey include the Antioch, Concord, and
Soils suited for development with limitations: Pleasanton faults. Additionally, faults of
undetermined status include the Pinole, Franklin,
• Antioch loam (AdQ - high shrink-swell Clayton-Marsh Creek, and Mount Diablo faults.
potential, low strength, 2 to 9 percent
slope Parts of the Clayton-March Creek geologic fault
line and its lateral projections extend into MVS
• Capav clay (CaQ -high shrink-swell Concord. This fault is considered a major active
potential, low strength, 2 to 9 percent fault within Contra Costa County. In the period
between 1934 to 1941 there have been at least
• Diablo clay (DdD) high shrink-swell five earthquakes with Richter scale magnitudes
potential, low strength, 9 to 15 percent between 2.5 and 3.4 which had epicenters on oi-
slope, very close to NW Concord's property. In
addition, the Concord Fault, which lies just to
Soils unsuited for development or suited for the west of the NIVS Concord, could produce an
development only with severe limitations: earthquake of between magnitude 5.0 and 6.0
over the next 50-year period,
• Altamont-Fontana Complex (AcF) - high
shrink-swell potential, low soil strength, The project site is not within an Alquist-Priolo
high erosion potential, 30 to 50 percent Special Studies Zone.
slope 4.4 HYDROLOGY
• Altamont-Fontana complex (AcG) - high
shrink-swell potential. low soil strength, The project area is on the landward side of a
very high erosion potential, 50 to tidal marsh adjacent to Suisun Bay (Figure 4.4-1).
75 percent slope Offsite stormwater runoff enters the project area
from drainage areas to the west, south, and east.
• Diablo Clay (DdE) - high shrink-swell Three offsite drainage areas in the hills south of
potential, low soil strength, moderate the project area contribute runoff in a northerly
erosion potential.. 15 to 30 percent slope direction-,however, the Contra Costa Canal along
the base of the hills intercepts runoff from all but
• Joice muck (Ja) - extreme shrink-swell one of these drainage areas. Runoff from this
potential, highly acidic soil, high water easternmost offsite draimage area flows beneath
table, subject to flooding, low soil strength. the canal immediately east of the project area
and drains northward toward the elevated Union
4.3.3 Seismicity Pacific (UP) railroad tracks. Runoff is diverted to
the west by the elevated tracks and concentrates
California is one of the most. seismically active in a depression 1,800 feet east of Main Street
areas in the world and is still being formed by north of the project site. This depression drains
geologic forces. Lines of stress created by to an existing concrete box culvert and channel
these forces accumulate energy that is relieved beneath the tracks.
only through movement of large structured
blocks. The stress lines, or faults, in Contra
Costa County that have shown sips of
K37303-H 28
t '•s>��a.•'ti}t '+ f ,+ _r ha, Y '. f 1 t .-yy.. �. Or t J`t 4 r
'+ ? c .` +J `. ., � r *♦� '.t v art.. Z- ti - L -<
1t` •J '• L t + .,� t td.e r vL SCS 1� 5 ♦� i ti v.. ; r :` of `. r
C a
t 1
t i
r L. F :•r r '.': 4 L ! _?�, r r..
L t,• V t C }a J .L 4 �. r 1 ti .\ .' .y: t'
{ • ,•r„��y y r ' �nt'ta� ^,+a. .'* r .«r '• .,st r � t` �. L .� L � r 1
h,? v Y••,�,a ..:_r �,rte"`.�,,, � �y(�//; 1__ �"' :�{ v v� 1 ° f `, b -' � t• S`'�
✓fL`' yIJ •1 A-3—
tY` f'ir s�� Fri � - ,I ,i ' � 1 � �„�����..� � ;i;•'•�rti .t. rf �' Lie' r�J ar:
JA I1
a
%V11.
-51
�! ! rp•;~ `f/� 1 �/_: yam/._V `` �.. _
��`'�1 •+ /i� \`J�� � .1'1,i. ��_ �%�G-^' r '�'�+xYr t LJ ,f ���I �� .
F ;I•- a'�`"r s�`•�c __ 10—
"'W'%
6iW` fro.•,.a•Zri �I� ' _ � + -..iti`�Yi'fi� i.. ,' , °�
we
a,*. •Lap a a1 s ? -1 ' i
Y'San
�.•A.,.rrrti*,�rJ ,r{� + , � I �1 r��f�'!�``!1„aait9�" �� ��r• °�d��l �
� .
CA Ilellip ;Raw*, rb.
S
xv.•*°y L,- r?' �jjt�a'�/�''�� ��. I �� ��$`�' �� "'I� �I �8' �---"�bio^_ sa' —
x��?J,r`J• t a�: 7 /{ilio ,A p6. i � �� ` � � :sI• iV..
ex
tri t?rrr i•_ r /JP —=6. !v „v�= - �?A a �'sem?.' �.LCE.r�` '( ��y
w +.ter r
, k.
�i
a r�.d� '..�� L• 1 i tti• `/ `�1 �� l �".�.� ��t. '.'i� � � `�,� _ �:. �' �a 4 s� k"`r��_'
r`aey`•9�
LEGEND
DRAJNAGE AREA BOUNDARY
CONTRA •
DRAINAGE FLOWDIRECTION
FLOOD HAZARD ZONE A
Naval Weapons Station Concord
ContainerizaflonProject
Figure
•FACE WATER
NT. • SCALE ,. . . .
Affected Environment '
A second contributing.offsite drainage area lies 4.5 AIR QUALITY
southwest of the site between the canal at the
base of the hills to the south and the elevated 4.5.1 Climate
UP railroad tracks to the west. Runoff from
this drainage area concentrates in a swale The study area is in the San Francisco Bay Area
along the eastern limits of the elevated tracks. Air Basin. The'l'arge, shallow basin is
Drainage continues in a northerly direction in surrounded by hills and has a temperate-marine
this swale along the southern edge of the climate characterized by cool moist winters,
tracks toward a depression in the project warm summers, and an annual period of drought
boundary area immediately west of Main from late spring through late fall. Dominant
Street (Figure 4.4-1). features of the local climatic regime are winter
cyclonic storm systems and daily wind patterns
The project site contains two onsite drainage through Carquinez Strait. Fog may occur in the
areas (Figure 4.4-1). The eastern portion of Bay Area at any time during the year but is more
the site drains as sheetflow with little common during the late spring and summer
evidence of channelization toward the months.
depression east of Main Street along the
southern edge of the UP tracks. In the Wind is an integral feature of the climatic regime
depression, this runoff combines with runoff near Carquinez Strait. Winds are not strong in
from the offsite drainage area in the hills to most areas within and around San Francisco Bay;
the south of the project site. however, winds increase in speed significantly t
when they are channeled-through a gap such as
The remaining portion of the project site Carquinez Strait. The strait is the largest and
drains toward the depression west of Main lowest wind gap between the Central Valley of
Street along the elevated UP railroad tracks. California and the Pacific Ocean (and
Water ponds in this depression until the water San Francisco Bay). Consequently, wind speeds
level exceeds the elevation of Main Street and through the strait may be 18.5 to 37 km/hr (10 to
flow continues in an easterly direction along 20 knots) higher than at nearby protected areas
the tracks. The depression west of.Main (Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 1985).
Street contains no low flow drainage outlet. During the spring and summer months, diurnal ,
heating of air masses in the Central Valley draws
The Master Plan for the NWS Concord air inward through the strait, with wind speeds ..
(IVESTDIV, 1989) shows the two depressions increasing as the day progresses. This pattern of.
as floodplain areas of freshwater inundation. air movement is reversed during evening and
These two areas and the adjacent marsh areas night hours.
north and west of the elevated UP tracks are
within a Federal Insurance Administration Mean annual temperatures-around the Bay Area
(FIA) (now known as Federal Emergency range from 12 to 16°C (54 to 61°F;Eicher, 1988).
Management Agency) hazard area (FIA, 1977). Precipitation generally decreases from north to
Zone A delineations are flood insurance rate south and from west to east in the region.
zones that correspond to 100-year floodplains Estimates of mean annual precipitation at various
determined in a Flood Insurance Study (FIS) locations in the Bay Area range from 330 to
by approximate methods and not by a detailed 635 mm (13 to 25 in.; Eicher, 1988). Average
hydraulic analysis. No base flood elevations relative humidity near the bay is constant at
or flow depths are typically provided for a 80 percent, while humidity of inland areas
Zone A designation. The Zone A flood hazard ranges from 60 percent in the summer to
area is.shown on Figure 4.4-1. 75 percent in the winter (Eicher, 1.988).
K37303-1-1 30 '
Affected Environment
Precipitation and temperature data for the permits for new and modified facilities, and
region including the project area were directs air quality planning in its jurisdiction.
collected from the Richmond climatic MVS Concord lies within the jurisdiction of the
recording station, selected for its proximity to BAAQMD.
Carquinez Strait and its geography similar to
the project site. The Richmond climatic The CAA states that all applicable federal and
recording station is approximately 18 km state ambient air quality standards must be
(11 mi.) southwest of Carquinez Strait. maintained during the operation of any emission
Climatic records at the Richmond station for source. Table 4.5-1 lists both national and
the 30-vear normal period from 1961 through California primary and secondary standards for
1990 indicate a mean annual precipitation of various pollutants. Primary standards are
56.4 cm (22.2 in.) per year. Over 83 percent. of mandated by the CAA to protect the public
total annual precipitation occurs from health, and secondary standards are intended to
November through March. Temperature data protect the public welfare from the adverse
were also collected at the Richmond station. effects of a pollutant, such as materials soiling.
,. For fall and winter months (October through vegetation damage, and visibility impairment.
March) during the 30-year period, the average The CAA also delegates to each state the
maximum daily temperature was 17.3°C authority to establish its own air quality rules
(63.1°F) and the average minimum daily and regulations. The CAA requires that states
temperature was 7.9°C (46.2°F). In the spring where the NAAQS are exceeded prepare a State
and summer months (April through Implementation Plan (SIP) that identifies how the
1 September) of the 30-year period, the state will meet the standards within the time
maximum daily temperature averaged 21.5°C frames mandated by the Clean Air Act
(70.7°F) and the minimum daily temperature Amendments of 1990.
averaged 12.1°C (53.8°F). Mean daily
�. temperatures averaged 12.6°C (54.7°F) in the The 1990 CAA requires areas in nonattainment
fall and winter and 16.8°C (62.3°F) in the of the NAAQS for ozone to reduce basinwide
spring and summer (L'SDC-NOAH- volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions by
Environmental Data and Information 15 percent for the first 6 years and by an average
Sen7ice. 1993). of 3 percent per year thereafter until attainment
is reached. The SIP control measures must
4.5.2 Applicable Air Quality identify in that will facilitate the reduction in
Regulations emissions and show progress toward attainment
of the ozone standard. For carbon monoxide
Air quality regulations were first promulgated (CO) nonattainmew areas, a plan must be
with the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1969. submitted that identifies ways to reduce CO
This act established the National Ambient Air emissions and shows progress toward attainment.
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and delegated the Additionally, the 1990 CAA promulgated new
enforcement of air pollution control to the toxic air pollutant standards and identified
' states. In California, the Air Resources Board affected sources and control measures required to
(ARB) is the agency responsible for regulating meet these standards.
air pollution sources. The ARB, in turn, has
delegated the responsibility of regulating The 1990 CAA established new nonattainment
stationary emission sources to local air classifications, new emission control
pollution control or management districts. requirements, and new compliance dates for
areas presently in nonattainment of the NAAQS.
The Bay Area Quality Management District based upon a design day value. The design day
(BAAQMD) is responsible for the value is the fourth highest pollutant
implementation and enforcement of state and concentration recorded in a 3-year period. The
federal air quality regulations within the San requirements and compliance dates for reaching
Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB). The attainment are based on the nonattainment
BAAQMD develops and enforces air quality classification.
regulations for stationary sources, issues
' K37303-H 31
Table 4.5-1. National and California Ambient Air Quality Standards
(ax National Standards
Averaging
Pollutant Time California Standards Primary(c,d) Secondary(c,e)
Ozone (03) 1 Hour 0.09 ppm 0.12 ppm Same as Primary
(180µg/m3) (235 µg/m3) Standard
Carbon Monoxide 8 Hours 9 ppm 9 ppm
(CO) (10 mg/m3) 10 mg/M3)
1 Hour 20 ppm 35 pprui
(23 mg/m3) (40 Ing/m3)
Nitrogen Dioxide Annual 0.053 ppm Same as Primary
(NO2) (100 Yg/m 3) Standard
1 Hour 0.25 ppm
(470 Ag/m3)
Sulfur Dioxide (S02) Annual 0.03 ppm --
(80
(80 Yg/MI)
24 Hours 0.04 ppm 0.14 ppm
(I 05.pg/m') (365 pg/m')
3 Hours 0.5 ppm
(1,300 µg/ml)
I How- 0.25 ppm --
(655 pg/m')
Particulate Matter Annual 30 µg/m310 50µg/m3(9) Same as Primary
Standard
24 Hours 50 A&IM3 150 Ag/M3
Sulfates 24 Hours 25 /ig/m3
Lead 30 Days 25 µg/m3
Quarterly 1.5 µg/m3 Same as Primary
Standard
Hydrogen Sulfide 1 How, 0.03 ppm
(42 Ag/ml)
Vinyl Chloride 24 Hours 0,010 ppm
(2 6µg/m')
K37303-H
32
Table 4.5-1. National and California Ambient Air Quality Standards
National Standards
Averaging
,
Pollutant Time California Standards('0 Primary(cd) Secondary(c.e)
Visibility"" 8 Hours (10 a.m. to In sufficient amount to
6 p.m.) produce an extinction
coefficient of 0.23 per km due
to particles when the relative
humidity is less than 70 percent.
ARB Method V.
Notes:
a. California standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide (1-hour and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide,
particulate matter, and visibility reducing particles are values that are not to be exceeded. The sulfates, lead,
hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride are not to be equaled or exceeded.
b. National standards other than ozone and those based on annual averages or arithmetic means, are not to be
exceeded more than once a year. The ozone standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar
year with a maximum hourly average concentrations above the standard is equal to or less than one.
c. Equivalent units given in parenthesis are based on reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of
760 nim of mercury. All measurements of air quality are corrected to a reference lemperatw-e of 25°C and a
reference pressure of 760 mm of mercury (1,013.2 millibar); ppm in this table refers to ppm by volume, or
micromoles of pollutant per more of gas.
d. National Primary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary with an adequate margin of safety to protect the
public health.
e. National Secondary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary protect the public welfare from any known or
anticipated adverse effects from a pollutant.
f. Calculated as geometric mean.
g. Calculated as arithmetic mean.
h. This standard is intended to limit the frequency and severity of visibility impairment due to regional haze and is
equivalent to a 10-mile nominal visual range when relative humidity is less than 70 percent.
ppm Parts per million.
km Kilometer.
ARB Air Resources Board.
pg/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter.
K37303-H
33
Affected Environment '
In addition, the 1990 CAA amendments also townsite. Organics and metals are present in soil
requires that any federally funded project and groundwater at this IR site. Given the low
comply with the air, quality standards and permeability of tidal area soil and the fact that
regulations that have been established by this site is downgradient of the old town, it is
federal, state, and local regulatory agencies. unlikely that it has impacted the project area.
All other IR sites are farther away from the . I
The 1990 CAA requires federal actions to proposed project area and thus are unlikely to
complete an analysis of whether the project have impacted this area.
would conform to the requirements of the
most recent federally approved SIP. Final A RCRA Facility Assessment report prepared in
guidelines on how to perform the conformity 1992 identified 49 sites that may have
analvsis were recently promulgated by the environmental problems due to site usage. Three
EPA(EPA. 19.93). of these sites are approximately 800 feet north of
the former town; either diesel fuel or hazardous
4.5.3 Existing Air Quality materials were stored in underground storage
tanks at these sites. Because the sites are
Because monitored concentrations of ozone downgradient of the project area, they are not
and PNI,o (particulate matter less than likely to have affected that area. An electrical
10 microns in diameter) have exceeded state transformer at a site adjacent to the western end
ambient air quality standards at ARB air of Pier 2 has weeped oil; the transformer has
quality monitoring stations in the SFBAAB, been removed and all problems have been
the ARB has designated the entire SFBAAB as mitigated. Hazardous materials were stored on
being in nonattainment of the state ozone and Pier 3. The California Environmental Protection
PNII,c standards (ARB. 1.992). However, the Agency (Cal/EPA) Department of Toxic
SFBAAB is in attainment of federal ozone and Substances Control (DTSC) determined that no
PM10 standards. Oniv some urbanized releases occurred from this area and that no ,
portions of the SFBAAB are classified as being further action is required. All other sites
in nonattainment of federal and state CO identified in the RCRA Facility Assessment are a
standards; the 11AVS Concord area is in substantial distance from the proposed project
attainment of these standards. The SFBAAB is area and therefore have little potential to have
designated as being in attainment of all other impacted this area.
state and federal air quality standards.
4.7 PUBLIC HEALTH AND
The emission sources currently at the project SAFETY
site are motor vehicles and generators
associated with general station operations. Most of the Station's public health and safety
Major emission sources at the NWS Concord issues are related to explosive safety quantity
include mobile equipment, motor vehicles, distance (ESQD) arcs related to explosives
paint and solvent sources, fuel storage and operations. ESQD hazard zone or ,
handling facilities, and boilers. "quantity-distance" requirements for explosive
material are established by the Department of
4.6 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Defense Explosives Safety Board (DDESB). The
principal considerations that govern ESQD
NWS Concord is conducting remedial requirements are the amount and type of material
investigations at a number of sites as part of involved, separation distances, and material
the Installation Restoration (IR) Program. IR segregation. ESQD requirements become more
sites are areas at federal facilities that are stringent as the quantity of explosive material
undergoing investigations and/or remediation increases.
because of soil/groundwater contamination;
there are eight IR sites in the tidal areas. The The tidal area was planned and constructed in
IR site closest to the proposed project area is a 1944 following the explosion at Pier 1 on July 17,
former wood hogger site approximately 1944. Man_v of the current safety criteria are a
1,200 feet northwest of the old Port Chicago result of the Port Chicago accident. However, the
K37303-H 34
r
Affected Environment
tidal area reconstruction preceded the during Congressional hearings in regard to
promulgation of the criteria, and much of the the purchase of Port Chicago.
physical plant is substandard relative to
current quantity-distance separations. In Magazines: In the tidal area are 28
1967, Congress authorized the acquisition of barricaded rail sidings and 10 sidings that
5,021 acres of land that included the have small, high-explosive cubicles. Their
Port Chicago townsite to achieve use is severely restricted because of their
quantity-distance safety. In approving the proximity to the piers. To provide adequate
legislation, Congress gave the Navy a mandate separation distance to the piers, Class 1,
to develop a comprehensive plan to eliminate Division 1 ammunition cannot be stored in
the remaining safety criteria infractions. In a most sidings. Two other factors restrict the
1957 study. Arthur D. Little. Incorporated, use of the sidings: inadequate intermagazine
enumerated 40 infractions of safety criteria in distance between sidings and inadequate
the tidal area. distances from other inhabited buildings.
These infractions can be grouped into four The Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) has the
categories: authority to grant waivers and exemptions to
explosive safety criteria, thus permitting
• Inhabited Buildings: All three continued operations for a designated period.
ammunition wharves are considered Exemptions are granted only when immediate
potential explosion sites (PES) because corrective measures are impractical and only if
explosives handling authorizations form positive programs for the eventual correction of
the basis for the ESQD arcs emanating the deficiency are planned. Exemptions are
from the piers. The piers, with their large granted for the estimated period necessary to
explosive limits, generate extensive correct the deficiency.
quantity-distance arcs that encompass I
some inhabited buildings in the tidal area. A waiver is written authority that provides a
temporary, short-term exception and permits
• Passenger Railroad and Shipping: deviation from a mandatory requirement of
AMTRAK currently operates passenger NAVSEA OP-5, "Ammunition and Explosives
service on the Southern Pacific rail line Ashore." It is cancelled upon scheduled work or
through the tidal area. The rail line is correction of the waivered conditions.
within the prescribed quantity distance of
i.
the three outloadmg piers. Exemption E2B-77, "Tidal Area Explosives
Handling Operations," provides blanket coverage
The commercial shipping channel that for waterfront operations. The deficiency
passes through Suisun Bay and serves resulted from facilities constructed prior to the
Stockton. Sacramento, and other ports establishment of current explosives safety
along the Sacramento River is within standards. Compliance with these standards
300 feet of the explosives loading piers. would require extensive construction.
This is less,than the required safety
distance. 4.8 VISUAL AND AESTHETICS
• Separation Distance: Piers 2. 3, and 4 NWS Concord extends from Suisun Bav
each has about 1,200 feet of berthing. The southward to a point approximately 2 miles
explosive limits on the piers require a pier north of Mount Diablo. Most of the Station's
separation distance that does not exist if land area lies along a broad valley plain and_
thestandard separation factors are used. southwest-facing slope. At the base of the slope
The separation of the piers as constructed is Seal Creek, also known as Mount Diablo
provides a risk factor that corresponds to Creek, which terminates in the tidal marshes of
unbarricaded, aboveground magazine Suisun Bay. Much of the Station's land area
separation. This reduced factor has been appears to be vacant, but actually functions as an
accepted by the DDESB and was supported explosive safety zone.
K3730 3-H 35
Affected Environment
The tidal area of the Station includes six the tidal area are covered by ESQD arcs, which
islands in Suisun Bay and about 6,000 acres serve as safety buffers for ammunition loading
on the mainland south of Suisun Bay. operations on the piers.
Physical characteristics include a large
marshland adjacent to the bay, a higher gently Near the eastern portion of the tidal area is a
sloping central area, and steep sandstone hills privately owned industrial area occupied by
that form the area's southern boundary. General Chemical Corporation and the Chemical
Facilities in the developed portion include and Pigments Company. Three railroad lines
tlu•ee explosive handling piers and a barge pier cross the area: the Atchison, Topeka and Santa
along the water's edge, rail holding yards and Fe, the Southern Pacific, and the Union Pacific.
barricaded sidings, and warehouses and other The,Mokelumne Aqueduct and Contra Costa
support buildings. The remainder of the area Canal cross the tidal area roughly parallel to and
consists of wetlands and hillsides. Except for south of Port Chicago Highway. Portions of the
the tidal marshes and wetlands, the southern Pacific Gas and Electric Companv (PG&E) power
waterfront along this portion of Suisun Bay is gid are on easements that cross the Station
almost entirely industrialized with very few through the hills in the tidal area and parallel to
recreational areas or public access points. Port Chicago Highway. Several oil pipelines pass
There are few visitors to the area. With the through the tidal area, some along Port Chicago .
closing of public roads that cross the site in Highway and others north of and parallel to the
February 1995, visibility to the public is Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way.
limited. According to the Station Master Plan, these
pipelines are a constraint to further development
The proposed containerization project would in that area. Port Chicago Highway through
involve construction at two locations within NWS Concord closed in February 1995.
the tidal area: at Pier 3 and in the westerly
portion of the tidal area along Port Chicago Pier 3, with a loading area approximately
Highway (Figures 4.8-1 through 4.8-4). Pier 3 1,200 feet long and 95 feet wide, is the site of the
is at the north end of Main Street, a north- proposed pier upgrade. Pier 2 has recently
south street that crosses the former undergone extensive rehabilitation; similar
Port Chicago townsite. The pier rests on rehabilitation of Pier 3 is scheduled to occur
pilings in Suisun Bay, and is similar in shortly.
appearance to the shipping facilities that
characterize this portion of the southern The proposed explosives holding yard site is
shoreline of Suisun Bay. Vessels are the currently vacant except for six buildings once
dominant visual feature when berthed at the used by residents of the former town of
pier. The site of the proposed explosives Port Chicago. Use of these buildings constitutes
holding yard south of the Southern Pacific a safety criteria infraction regarding minimum.
Railroad right-of-way is on gently sloping land separation distances between inhabited buildings
that rises to the south toward the Los Medanos and explosive operations facilities, and they have
Hills. Remnants of the former town of been certified for demolition as part of MILCON
Port Chicago, such as roadways and exotic P-101, Ordnance Operations Building, and new
vegetation, are visible. buildings are to be constructed on a site
immediately north of the town of Clyde. a�
4.9 LAND USE
Facilities in the tidal area include three
explosives handling piers, a barge pier, tug
basin, a 525-railcar barricaded siding complex,
two rail holding yards, facilities for
ammunition segregation and transfer, and
other limited support facilities. The remaining
land in the tidal area consists of wetlands and
hillsides. All but a few hundred acres within '
K37303-H 36
1
� s
3
... ...,ry,n'<>",:. �`e�.:T,.,yefar'"•,'",.m'ay.�::':'::5.'.y.'::i><:<.:,..:.'::F,:.::'.::�•i:'•5„=.:i„::;„ .!'N ,,P'' •'.5!n x.?n
N�
iFigure 4.8-1. Pier 3 as viewed toward the east from Pier 2.
. . .::... ...
g .
... . ... .... .. .:.....
.: . ...........
:..:. ...:........
..........
... .. .. ... .. .::::..
... . ....... ...
..........:.
.... .. ..........:.::..
. ...:.::.. .....
”
. ........:.
x
.:.:. .::::::...
... .........:......
.. .:......::::.:.....::.......
.. .....:::
..:. ... ...
.... .. : ...
. . .. ....... ...
j ,...
t
1
... ... ... .... ...
... ..... .......
Figure 4.8-2. Pier 3 as viewed toward the west from Pier 4.
Naval Weapons Station Concord 8
Containerizaton Projectg
' _ N
37
. . . . . .::...:.......
F :..... . . . . .
,
.......max.'✓�... ..................���::::.::.::::•:'::;«::-::.:R;:i;?:<"'.''......... � ..:,.
..... ... ..... ............. .�:.. ... ......... ..sem... .......... ..^
x„
....... .... .....
Figure 4.8-3. Pier 3 as viewed toward the north from Port Chicago Highway
. .. : ..... :...
. .:....:...::..
.............::.::.:::::
.. .. . .....
.....:.....
..........
...:.... .:
...:....::.
.. . ..:..:.
.::.....:..:::..
..:
........... .
.:.....,::
...........
.:..:....::.. ...:::.::..:.
a
pbYa»'
.• ...' sem.:
.,,...... .fur:•—:��,..: ::::»��'`:. .0 A .• ...
�:,.»�.;-:,,
.................... w,.e.•. ^�x. s:^:�x;•(.•.. .!�` ;�:�/� ,titer
» !
Figure 4.8-4. Site of proposed explosives holding yard as viewed toward the northeast from
main curve on Port Chicago Highway.
Naval Weapons Station Concord
Containerizaton Project
38
Affected Environment
4.9.1 Land Use Adjacent to the truck/container holding pads; acquisition of the
Tidal Area Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way; ordnance
operations building; rail/truck receiving and
Development on the land adjacent to the tidal inspection station;pier support complex; stuffing
area is similar to that in other waterfront facility barricade; interchange yard; classification
isections of the county, with wetlands and tidal yard: and motor pool.
marshes bordering Suisun Bay. North of State
Route 4 and west of the Station, land is Under the proposed action, improvements would
available in areas zoned for industrial be made to Pier 3, rather than Pier 2.
development. Several firms have located here,
particularly along Port Chicago Highway Federal and State Agencies
across from the Station's main gate. Phillips
Petroleum Company and Monsanto Chemical Federal and state agencies with regulatory
Company have facilities along Solano Way authority affecting land use in the project area
near Waterfront Road. The Contra Costa are identified in the Station Master Plan. This
Water District operates a treatment plant section describes the roles of the key agencies.
(Bollman Water Treatment Plant) and reservoir
(Mallard Reservoir) just west of Port Chicago Under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act
1 Highway. (CZMA) and its reauthorization amendments, any
federal activity directly affecting the coastal zone
East of the tidal area and north of the hills lie must proceed in a manner consistent with
' a small residential area (Shore Acres) and the approved state coastal zone management
unincorporated communities of Ambrose and programs to the maximum extent practicable.
Nest Pittsburg. Future development of land and is subject to the CZMA consistency
adjacent to the Station is expected to be requirement if it will affect any natural resources,
limited primarily to additional residential land uses, or water uses in the coastal zone.
development around the southern boundary of
the inland area. The San Francisco Bay Conservation and
Development Commission (BCDC) is the
4.9.2 Plans and Policies/ reviewing agency for CZMA. BCDC also has
Regulatory Framework legislative authority over non-federal projects in
and around San Francisco Bay. This authority
Station Master Plan extends to areas subject to tidal action including
sloughs, tidelands, submerged lands, marshlands,
The NWS Concord Master Plan Update. . and waterways, and to areas within a 100-foot
completed in 1989 and approved by the Chief band landward of and parallel to the shoreline.
of Naval Operations, recommended projected
land uses and facilities for the Station through Policies for the future use of the Station are
1996. The Master Plan is the document by contained in the San Francisco Bay Plan and in
which proposals for military construction and the Seaport Plan, a document adopted jointly by
special projects are evaluated. BCDC and the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission. The Bay Plan denotes as policy, in
One major need identified by the Master Plan map form, the intended future designation of the
is for new construction necessitated by the Station as a civilian port. A Bay Plan note
Station's designation as the West Coast point further indicates that "Port and industrial use
1 for- development of DOD containerized loading should be restricted so that they do not adversely
capability. The Master Plan sets forth a affect marshes." The Seaport Plan states "if and
corresponding proposal for developing when not needed by the Navy give first
facilities for containerization functions in the consideration to port or water-related industrial
tidal area of the Station, including an 800-foot use. .Port and industrial use should be restricted
extension of Pier 2 to accommodate container so they do not adversely affect the marshes."
cranes and facilities; a rail/truck transfer
facility for container handling: explosive
K31303-H 39
r
Affected Environment '
The State Lands Commission (SLC) is City of Concord General Plan
responsible for the administration of state
public trust lands in coastal waters. The Station's inland area lies within the Concord
city limits; the mainland portion of the tidal area
Contra Costa County General Plan is in unincorporated Contra Costa County but
within the sphere of influence of the city of
The land use map of the Contra Costa County Concord. The Land Use Element of the Concord
General Plan 1990-2005, designates the Station General Plan (1994) sets forth the goal of
as Public/Semi-Public (PS), except for tidal continuing and enhancing the long-standing
area wetlands and marshes, which are relationship with the Station, and delineates a
designated as Open Space (OS). As described specific objective recognizing the Station's
in the Land Use Element, the PS designation national security, open space, and wetlands '
applies to properties owned by governmental habitat values.
agencies, to public transportation corridors,
and to privately owned transportation and 4.10 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
utility corridors. The OS designation, in
general, applies to publicly owned open space Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to
lands not designated as Public and Semi- Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Public, Watershed, or Parks and Recreation, Populations and Low-Income Populations, was
and includes wetlands and tidelands and other signed February 11, 1994. Executive
areas of significant ecological resources or Order 12898 directs federal agencies ". . . .to
geologic hazards. make achieving environmental justice part of its
mission by identifying and addressing, as
The Ports and Proprietary Wharves subsection appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse
sets forth policies designed to maintain the human health or environmental effects of its
economic viability of existing ports, wharves programs, policies and activities on minority
and shipping lanes by recognizing and populations and low-income populations in the
encouraging the continued use of existing United States. . . ... The proposed
ports and proprietary wharves and advocating containerization project would be entirely within
the maintenance of deepwater channels at the tidal area of existing NWS Concord property.
depths that keep ocean vessel use viable from There is no resident minority and low-income
San Francisco to the Station. If the Station population exists in the affected environment.
ever becomes excess government property, it is The workforce that could be affected by the
County policy that the deep water port be proposed action is not composed of a
used as a private port. disproportionately high minority or low income
population.
The Open Space Element Scenic Resources
subsection designates Suisun Bay as a Scenic 4.11 TRANSPORTATION AND
Waterway. One general goal is to preserve the CIRCULATION
scenic quality of the San Francisco Bay / Delta ,
estuary system, with a specific policy that Three major transportation systems used to
maintenance of scenic waterways shall be support activities at N1WS Concord: roads, rail,
ensured through public protection of the and water.
marshes and riparian vegetation along the
shoreline. The major interstate highways in the area are
Interstate 80 and Interstate 680, while Routes 4
The Safety Element Hazardous Materials Uses and 24 are the major state highways in the area.
subsection identifies the Station on the State Route 4 is a limited access highway that
hazardous land use map and shows a 2-mile- begins at Interstate 80 in Hercules and extending
radius safety buffer zone extending from the eastward through NWS Concord. Travelling
area of the piers. Two petroleum pipelines are from NV1'S Concord to either Oakland, Alameda,
shown crossing the tidal area. No specific or San Francisco involves using State Route 24
policies pertaining to the Station are stated. and Interstate 680. Almost all of the heavily
K37303-H 40
Affected Environment
developed portions of the county are easily approaches the Concord area, passing through
accessible from NWS Concord by limited Oakland, Richmond, and San Pablo before
access highway. crossing the northern portion of the county, then
continues through Pittsburg and Antioch. The
Several secondary roads are of particular Union Pacific railroad tracks run from Pittsburg
interest to NWS Concord.. Bailey and Willow to the Station and terminate just north of the
Pass roads run through the inland portion of town of Clyde.
NWS Concord. Both of these two-lane roads
originate in the city of Concord and extend Moving ammunition by rail is a large part of the
northeast toward Pittsburg. Additionally, circulation pattern at NWS Concord. All trains
Waterfront Road and Port Chicago Highway arrive in the tidal area. Station-owned track
pass through the tidal area near the former parallels the controlled access road between the
town of Port Chicago although both roads are tidal area and the inland storage area. Like the
closed to the public within the Station. truck route, the rail lines cross Port Chicago
Waterfront Road originates in the industrial Highway at grade and run adjacent to the inland
waterfront development at Martinez and meets support complex.
Port Chicago Highway in the center of the
tidal area. Port Chicago Highway begins as a NWS Concord has access to San Francisco Bay
commercial street in Concord and passes and the Pacific Ocean via channels from
through the tidal area toward Pittsburg. Suisun Bay through the Carquinez Strait,
San Pablo Bay, and the San Pablo Strait. The
Access to the tidal area is through two gates. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has proposed
Gate 4 exits off Waterfront Road and is used enlarging and deepening sections of the route
most often by private vehicles and commercial between San Francisco and Suisun bays.
trucks. However, since February 1995 Gate 4
is normally locked in closed position. Gate 3 The 39 nautical miles of ship channels that lead
is farther inland near the main gate. It from NWS Concord to the Pacific Ocean have
provides access to a controlled road parallel to been described as hazardous and encumbered
Port Chicago Highway. An overpass with obstacles. From NWS Concord's piers to the
eliminates conflict with the commercial rail sea buoy southwest of the Golden Gate Bridge,
lines through the tidal area. This gate ships must pass through a series of narrows and
provides the most direct means of moving under bridges with limited clearance and make
ammunition between the inland and tidal numerous changes in course. Visibility is often
areas. poor, particularly during winter months. In
addition to poor climatic conditions, vessels face
Vehicles not using the Navy-owned road that strong currents and riptides along the sea route.
parallels Port Chicago Highway must enter the
tidal area through the gate on Waterfront Road The transportation of hazardous materials is
and cross three commercial tracks at regulated in California by both state and various
' intersection-controlled traffic signals. The bridge authorities. The explosive materials
closure of Port Chicago Highway and stored at NWS Concord fall into this category.
Waterfront Road eliminates the crossing
problem. The rail lines, however, will remain Routes designated by the California Highway
a barrier to the rapid movement to the pier. Patrol (CHP) for truck transportation of
ammunition include major freeways and other
The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe, the county highways. Because NWS Concord has
1 Southern Pacific, and the Union Pacific rail almost direct access to State Route 4,
lines cross the tidal area at the Station. The ammunition is not transported through
Santa Fe approaches the county from the residential areas in the Concord area.
San Joaquin Valley, crosses the county parallel
to the shoreline and services Antioch, Transportation of explosives is regulated by the
Pittsburg, before San Pablo, before terminating U.S. Department of Transportation which sets
in Richmond. The Southern Pacific line national safety guidelines that are incorporated
K37303-H 41
Affected Environment
into the California Vehicle and Health and Tidal 4.16 kV
Safety codes. Regulations apply to labeling,
packaging, and loading of explosives and The tidal area is served by 4.16 kV from two
safety equipment on trucks, and placarding for sources. Electricity is usually purchased from .
public information. Permits granted to Western Area Power Administration (WAPA). A
trucking companies may be revoked if spot 2,000-kilovolt ampere (kVA) transformer at the
checks by the CHP reveal an excess of inland main substation steps the WAPA 69 kV
violations. Bridge permits are granted for down to 12 kV. A Navy-owned 12-kV lines
explosive and corrosive shipments based on carries the WAPA power to Building 174 where it
the standards of the various bridge authorities. is stepped down to 4.16 kV distribution voltage.
In the Bay Area, hazardous materials cannot The 4.16 kV is distributed throughout the tidal
be transported across either the Golden Gate area via two circuits. An alternative_..supply of
Bridge or the San Francisco-Oakland Bay 4.16 kV is available to the tidal area from Pacific
Bridge. Gas &Electric (PG&E). This alternative 4.16 kV
line supplies power to the U.S. Coast Guard and
Rail transport is not regulated, but is normally Port Chicago School. It can be tied into the tidal
maintained to the standards of the U.S. area 4.16 kV system in Building E-82.
Department of Transportation for special car
design and safety procedures for loading and There is currently no emergency power
switching. Although not required by any generation capability on the tidal area 4.16-kV
regulations, the railroad companies have system. Although backup power is currently
initiated the practice of placing munitions cars available from PG&E and WAPA wheels its
on nonstop trains through populated areas. power to NWS Concord over PG&E's 21-kV line.
The PG&E 21 kV distribution system is looped
4.12 UTILITIES around NWS Concord and surrounding
communities so that a total loss of the high
NWS Concord depends.on private enterprise voltage transmission system or loss of power
and/or public utilities for most utilities source or failure of the loop downstream of each
support. The Station provides storm drainage, of the two PG&E supply substations would be
steam distribution, and compressed au necessary to cause a significantly long-term
distribution but is dependent on outside power outage.
sources for electrical power, communications,
sanitary sewer, water, and natural gas. The Tidal 12 kV ,
Station's water distribution system provides
water to the Concord Police Association A 12-kV line from PG&E serves the Q-Area,
facility on Avila Road. The Station provides Building 407, the Pier 4 hotel service for ships,
no other utility service to areas other than U.S. and several streetlight transformers. There is no
Government properties. Utilities potentially emergency generation on the 12-kV system for
affected by the proposed action include Building 407, Pier 4, or the streetlights. The
electricity, water, and sanitary sewer. Q-Area has.emergency generators in
Therefore the affected environment discussion Buildings 350 and 351.
is limited to those utilities.
4.12.2 Potable Water Distribution
4.12.1 Electrical Distribution
. The two major water supply networks serving
The electrical distribution system for NWS NWS Concord draw the potable water from local
Concord comprises four subsystems: inland public water utilities and pump the water into
4.16 kilovolts (kV), WQEC, tidal 4.16 kV, and storage reservoirs.
tidal 12 kV. The tidal subsystems are
described below. In the inland area are five storage tanks with an
aggregate volume of 1.7 million gallons (mg) and
five pumping stations. The tidal area is supplied
primarily by water from the.Contra Costa Water
K37303-H 42
Affected Environment
District (CCWD), which provides 35 to
40 pounds per square inch (psi). Water for the
tidal area is supplied through approximately
7,000 feet of 18- and 14-inch piping tied into 'a
1.1-mg storage tank located due south of Pier 3
in the tidal area south of the Port Chicago
Highway.
The CCWD also plans to install a 16-inch
diameter treated water main in the Port
Chicago Highway right-of-way to serve the Bay
Point comn-lunitV to the east.
4.12.3 Sewage Collection
Sanitary sewer service is provided to the tidal
area by the Delta Diablo Sanitary District. The
Station's collection system comprises of
43,000 feet of sewer line. The system has a
capacity of 450,000 gallons per day (gpd) with
an average flow of about 225.000 gpd.
K31103-H 43
Affected Environment
This page left intentionally blank.
K37303-H 44
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
This section describes the potential U.S. Army of Engineers has indicated that they
consequences of each alternative on will not exercise jurisdiction over the installation
environmental resources. Environmental of pier support and fender pilings at Pier 3
resources are presented in the same sequence (Franklin, 1995, personal communication).
as in Section 4.0. Potential impacts from the Consequently, permitting procedures under
alternatives are discussed for each resource. Sections 401-and 404 of the Clean Water Act will
Impacts are defined as significant or less than hot be required.
significant. Where significant or potentially
significant impacts are identified. mitigation Effects to the environment due to pilings
measures are recommended that, when installation during the upgrading of Pier 3 may
'implemented, would reduce the impact to a include an insignificant temporary increase in
less-than-significant level. turbidity. The project as proposed is not
expected to significantly affect fish or
The term "significant" is used to describe the estuarine/marine birds and mammals. The
magnitude of environmental disturbance that eucalyptus tree and raptor nest are located
could result from implementation of an outside the proposed construction zone of
alternative. Under NEPA, significance activity and would not be affected by project
requires an analysis of the context of an action implementation. Focused seasonal's-w-vevs for
and its intensity (40 CFR 1508.27). Context is sensitive plant and animal taxa will be '
related to the setting in which the action conducted. Use of the raptor nest will be
occurs, in that the effects are dependent on confirmed during spring-season surveys.
the presence or absence of environmental
resources. Intensity refers to the amount of Special status species having a high probability
change an action may cause to natural of occurring in the study area are listed in
activity. Table 4.1-1. Sensitive plant and animal species
that may utilize habitats within the proposed
5.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES zone of construction are discussed below.
Proposed Action California clapper rail (Rallus longirostfis
obsoletus) and California black rail (Laterallas
Implementation of the proposed action would jamaicensis coturniculus) were recorded in
result in the direct conversion of March-April 1994 (14ESTDR1994) in the
approximately 54 acres of ruderal and brackish marsh immediately south of Pier 3.
abandoned landscaped vegetation. and Low quality marginal black rail habitat is
0.37 acres of eucalyptus grove north of associated with the swale and pond south of the
Port Chicago Highway to accommodate Union Pacific Railroad track. The project as
proposed holding pads and rail access. proposed would not alter existing conditions of
Conversion of plant communities would the marsh, swale or pond. Project
include the loss of associated wildlife habitat. implementation, is not expected to result in
direct impacts to California clapper rail or
Construction associated with upgrading Pier 3 California black rail. The Navy is currently in
would include installation of additional consultation with the U.S. Fish and wildlife
pilings along the channel side of the existing Service regarding California clapper rail and
pier. Project-related effects that could trigger California black rail to determine an adequate
review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers buffer zone between proposed construction and
under the Clean water Act are limited to rail locations. Nesting season surveys will be ,
improvements on the channel side of Pier 3. conducted to identify rail activity in relation to
No impacts to jurisdictional wetlands above proposed construction.
the Suisun Bav shoreline will occur. The
K37303-H . 45
Environmental Consequences
5.1.2 No Action expected to result from implementation of the
proposed action.
No impacts to biological resources would
occur as a result of the no action alternative. 5.2.2 No Action
Existing conditions would continue.
No impacts to cultural resources would occur as
5.2 CULTURAL RESOURCES a result of the no action alternative.
5.2.1 Proposed Action - 5.3 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND
SEISMICITY
No historic properties eligible for inclusion on
the National Register of Historic.Places 5.3.1 Proposed Action
(NEEP) have been identified as part of the
archival research and the field inventory Although the proposed project site is not within
conducted for the proposed containerization an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone and is not
project. The Port Chicago Naval Magazine underlain by a know=n active fault, the project
explosion of July 17, 1944, is the most area is within a seismic activity zone of moderate
significant event to occur in the study area severity. Construction of the truck and rail
and has warranted a congressionally explosives holding yard and rail interchange yard
designated national memorial near the location will increase the number of onsite structures
of former Pier 1. The former town of potentially exposed to earthquakes or secondary
Port Chicago does not appear eligible for the seismic hazards.
NR1IP even though it was impacted by and
suffered considerable damage from the naval The effects of groundshaking during such
magazine explosion. The town was razed in moderate" seismic events could include
1969 as part of the development of a safety structural damage to the onsite structures and the
buffer zone for WIS Concord. concomitant exposure of people to the associated
risks. Groundshaking could result in burst utility
None of the surviving architectural resources pipes and damage to the proposed access rail and
within or formerly within the former town of roadways. The potential for liquefaction,
Bay Point/Port Chicago have been identified as settlement, and lateral spreading of the disturbed
eligible for the NRNP (see Selj et al., 1333). A onsite soils also exists, although the hazards
few isolated indicators of the former town's generated by these secondary effects would not
presence are present, but lack integrity and be significant given the proposed site
significance. Integrity has been breached configuration.
because of trash and refuse dumping by
residents of Contra Costa County prior to the Structures would be designed and constructed in
town's razing in 1969, the assignment of compliance with all applicable federal and state
salvage rights and the subsequent removal of requirements, including, but not limited to the
various materials by former Port Chicago federal and state Occupational Safety and Health
residents, and the intermixing of materials Administrations; the Uniform Building Code
from various households and areas during (UBC); and the Navy's seismic design manual
demolition, debris removal, and/or burial. P 355. The incorporation of the design safety
features would not eliminate the potential for
Because the proposed action will not conflict seismic hazards but would reduce the level of
with any cultural and historic protection risks resulting from project implementation to
measures and no cultural resources have been less than significant.
identified within the project area that would
(1) qualify for NRHP listing, (Z) have cultural Construction of the proposed action would alter
significance to a community, ethnic, or social the topography and overburden characteristics of
group. or (3) contain human remains, no the project site. Existing vegetation in the project
significant impacts to cultural resources are area would be at least partially removed and the
physical characteristics of the soil and the land
K37303•H 46
Environmental Consequences
surface altered before to the reestablishment of not include detailed hydraulic analysis of the
vegetation. Site disturbance would be limited these areas, no base flood elevations or depths of
to surface deposits; deeper geologic features ponding were determined.
would not be affected.
Construction of the proposed action would
The design of the structures to be built in the increase the amount of impervious cover between
project area would be governed by applicable the paved streets within the project boundaries
federal and state building, structural, grading, and alter existing drainage flow paths near the
and development standards. Soils engineering proposed concrete rail/truck container holding
and engineering geology reports that detail site pads. These site modifications would increase
design features necessary to minimize stormwater runoff from the project site: however,
potential hazards related to structures and onsite drainage controls would be designed to
grading plans based upon the characteristics of ensure maintenance of the existing surface water
the site soils.and geologic features would be discharge locations along the site perimeter.
prepared. Restrictions on slope design to
prevent slope failure and erosion potential. Stormwater runoff from the project site'e would be
and the use of erosion control devices such as directed toward the two localized depressions
check dams or riprap to minimize potential and Zone A designations along the southern edge
hazards would be included where necessarv. of the elevated UP railroad tracks. There are no
Conformance with these standards will reduce structures in the area surrounding these
potential hazards related to slope soil stability, depressions and none would be developed in the
soil compaction, erosion control, and other future because the area is within the explosive
structural design conditions. Therefore. the safety quantity distance arcs of the proposed
proposed action would not have a significant explosives holding yard. An increase in the
impact relative to soil hazards. amount of stormwater runoff that concentrates in
these localized depressions may raise the level of
5.3.2 No Action ponding in these areas but would not
significantly increase the flood hazard to adjacent
No impacts relative to geology, soils, or properties.
seismicity would result from the no action
alternative. The proposed action includes the construction of
structures, roads, and utilities that would involve
5.4 HYDROLOGY grading, excavation, and other
construction-related activities and could expose
5.4.1 Proposed Action soil to erosion at an accelerated rate during storm
events. Site topography is relatively flat and the
Development of the proposed action would erosion potential is minimal, but stormwater
impact the existing FIA 100-year Zone A runoff if improperly controlled could carry an
floodplain delineation adjacent to the project increased load of sediments to adjacent surface
site. This is considered a less than significant waters.
impact.
Because construction activities associated with
Federal Insurance Administration (now the the proposed action would disturb more than
Federal Emergency Management Agency) 5 acres of land, the proposed construction would
Zone A flood hazard areas are adjacent to the be required to comply with the National
project site. Two of these areas are in Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
depressions along the elevated Union Pacific General Construction Activity Storm Water
(UP) railroad tracks north of the project site. Permit. The Station would be required to
The entire marsh area west and north of the prepare and retain at the construction site a
railroad tracks is also shown to be within the Storinwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPP)
Zone A flood hazard area. Because the that describes the site and construction activities,
Zone A boundaries for these offsite areas were construction erosion and sediment controls,
delineated by a flood insurance study that did means of waste disposal during construction and
K37303-H 47
Environmental Consequences
site operations, implementation of approved Shall not cause or threaten to cause
local plans, postconstruction sediment and pollution, contamination, or nuisance
erosion control measures, maintenance and
inspection responsibilities during and after Shall not discharge stormwater containing a
construction. and non-stormwater management hazardous substance equal to or in excess of
controls. The Station would also be required a reportable quantity listed in 40 CFR
to inspect the construction site before and Part 117 and/or 40 CFR Part 302
after storms to identify stormwater discharges,
any noncompliances associated with the Shall not adversely impact human health or
construction activity. and the need for the environment
additional stormwater pollution controls
where necessary. Shall not discharge any stormwater in
violation of any applicable water quality
Compliance with the permit would require standard.
implementation of Best Management Practices
(BMPs) associated with the reduction of Adherence to NPDES requirements during
erosion, sedimentation, and non-stormwater construction and site operations after completion
discharges from construction sites. The of construction would ensure that impacts to the
objectives of BMPs for stormwater water quality of adjacent surface waters would be
management are to follow good housekeeping less than significant.
practices; contain and properly dispose of
construction-generated waste; minimize the Development of the proposed action would
area of disturbance; stabilize disturbed areas; include the construction of structures within
protect slopes and channels, control the site floodprone areas.
perimeter: and control internal erosion
(SlormT4,ateF Quality Task Force, 1973). BMPs Ammunition Pier 3, located within the FIA
typicallN, implemented to control erosion and Zone A flood hazard designation area for Suisun
sedimentation during construction activities Bay, would be upgraded to support two
include vegetative stabilization of slopes and 40-tan-capacity container cranes. A 15-foot
channels, sill fences, straw bale barriers, concrete deck extension would be added to an
sediment traps or basins, temporary earthen existing pier. Because these proposed site
dikes, and storm drain inlet controls. The improvements involve only the modification of
inspection, maintenance and monitoring an existing pier facility and do not propose the
requirements of the NPDES permit would construction of new structures within the flood
ensure that any potentially significant impacts hazard zone, flood hazards would be less than
would be reduced to less than significant significant.
through the use of stormwater BMPs during
construction and through project design 5.4.2 No Action
features during operations.
No impact relative to hydrology would occur as a
Base operations are subject to the conditions result of the no action alternative.
of the NPDES stormwater discharge permit for
industrial activities.'. The permit details 5.5 AIR QUALITY
effluent limitations and requires the
preparation of a SVVTPP and monitoring and 5.5.1 Proposed Action
inspection at stormwater discharge points from
industrial sites. Specifically, the requirements During construction of the proposed action,
state that industrial operations must ensure temporary emissions of fugitive dust (including
that the project: PM,,), vehicular and equipment exhaust, and
• Shall not allow the discharge of material reactive organic gases (ROG) would occur.
other than stormwater
K37303-H 48
Environmental Consequences
Fugitive dust is emitted during earthmoving proposed action would conform to the
activities, when driving over unpaved surfaces, requirements of the CAA.
and as a result of wind erosion over exposed
and dry soil surfaces. Dust emissions would 5.5.2 No Action.
vary with the level of activity, the silt and
moisture content of the soil, and wind speed. No air quality impacts would occur as a result of
A large fraction of the dust emitted would the no action alternative.
settle out of the atmosphere rapidly and would
not create a public health problem, but could 5.6 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
cause a nuisance to nearby properties.
Smaller particulates (PM,,) would remain 5.6.1 Proposed Action
suspended for a longer period.
No known contaminated sites are present in the
EPA measurements made during apartment project area. Gasoline, diesel fuel, oil, paints,
and shopping center construction provide an solvents, and lubricants would be used to fuel
approximation of the maximum rate of and maintain equipment during construction
particulate emissions. Adjustments for time and/or would be applied to newly constructed
and PM,0 content made by the South Coast Air facilities or structures. They would be used and
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to stored onsite in accordance with applicable state
EPA measurements provide for an emission and federal regulations. These materials would
factor of 26.4 pounds of PM,, per acre per day be stored away from surface water sources in
of construction activity (SCAQMD, 1993). bermed areas to minimize the potential for
accidentally spilled material to come into contact.
Assuming that 1 acre would be disturbed on a with surface water. Also, see Section 5.4.1 for a
single day, up to 26.4 pounds of PM,, would discussion of measures that would be
be emitted on a daily basis during the'grading implemented to minimize pollution,to surface
phase. It is unlikely that this would create water.
PM,, concentrations near the project site that
would exceed the state 24-hour standard of Implementation of the proposed action would be
50 mg/m'.. Emissions of PM,,, during in compliance with all applicable federal, state,
construction are not considered a significant and local laws, regulations and standards relating
air quality impact. to hazardous materials. It would not create a
substantial hazard to the public or environment
Relativelv small amounts of CO, NO2, SO2, and involving the likely release of a hazardous
ROG would be produced by fuel combustion material, nor would it interfere with any
in construction equipment and vehicles, community emergency response or evacuation
Paints, asphalt., and solvents also emit ROGs. plans. Therefore, no significant impact relative
All paints and solvents used would be to hazardous materials would occur as a result of
required to comply with applicable BAAQMD the proposed action.
regulations that limit then-volatile organic
compounds content. 5.6.2 No Action
The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments require No significant impact relative to hazardous
federal actions that are located in a federal materials would occur as a result of the no action
nonattainment area to complete an analysis of alternative..
whether the project would conform to the
requirements of the most recently approved 5.7 PUBLIC HEALTH AND
SEP. The proposed project site is located in a SAFETY
portion of the SFBAAB that is in attainment of
all the federal air quality standards. Since the 5.7.1 Proposed Action
project is located in an area that is in
attainment of all federal air quality standards, Implementation of the proposed action would not
a conformity analysis is not required and the alter the explosive safety quantity distance
K37303•H 49
Environmental Consequences
(ESQD) arcs in the vicinity of the piers. New 5.7.2 No Action
ESQD arcs would be created within the old
Port Chicago tow-nsite associated with the No public health and safety impacts would occur
development of the rail and truck explosives as a result of the no action alternative.
holding yard (Figure 5.7-1). These new ESQD
arcs would not create any safety criteria 5.8 VISUAL AND AESTHETICS
infractions. No conflicting lana uses that
could create a public health and safety issue 5.8.1 Proposed Action
relative to the ESQD arcs exist within that
portion of the tidal area. The proposed containerization project would
involve construction at two locations within the
Loading and unloading of containerized tidal area: at Pier 3 on Suisun Bay, and at the
ammunition to and from ships is conducted site of the former town of Port Chicago, south of
more safely using pier-mounted container the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way along
cranes. Container cranes are considered safer Port Chicago Highway.
than mobile harbor cranes.for the following
reasons: The Pier 3 loading area would be extended
15 feet to accommodate two crane rail beams,
• Load motion is two dimensional i.e., no and two 40-ton-capacity container cranes would
rotational motion
on of the loaded container be installed. Existing pier lighting would be
or the crane boom relocated behind the new land-side crane rail
• The crane boom does not move during beam and other support facilities would be
modified. Except when vessels are berthed at'the
loading/unloading so that the boom cannot pier, the dominant visual feature would be the
interfere with ship structure, ship gear or container cranes. When the cranes are not in
adjacent cranes use. the hinged booms in stowed position would
extend approximately 260 feet from the deck of
• Operator visibility on container cranes is the pier. When the cranes are in use, these
superior due to a traveling operator cab. structures would extend approximately 140 feet
The operator is always directly above the from the deck of the pier (Figure 3-2). Public
load when connecting and releasing the views of the improvements to Pier 3 would be
container at the pier, above ship deck and from Suisun Bay (Figure 5.8-1). The container
below ship deck cranes would be similar in appearance and
height to the floating harbor crane currently in
• Container cranes cannot tip due to an use. The proposed cranes would be noticeable,
overload or snagged container. They are but would be consistent with the general
equipped with a standard anti-snag feature character of the industrialized waterfront.
which prevents sudden unexpected loads Therefore, no significant adverse visual impacts
from being transmitted to the boom if the would be expected to occur as a result of the
container snags in the cell guides of the proposed improvements to Pier 3.
ship while lifting
The former Port Chicago townsite would be
• The standard 100 foot gauge, rail-mounted occupied by eight explosives holding pads with
cranes will straddle the existing pier, earthen barricades, four loading docks, and a rail
leaving the entire pier deck area clear for interchange/inspection yard. Other visible
cargo traffic and emergency vehicle access. improvements would include site lighting,
electrical distribution lines, fencing, landscaping.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed
action could reduce the chances of an accident
occurring relative to the loading and
unloading of ammunition on ships at Pier 3
and improve the public health and safety.
K37303-H so
_..-
... .......
. ........
.. ..... ...........
..........
.... ...........
...... .......
....
1 = .........
...
. ......... ...
...........
_ _.. . : . .
.... ........
... ...... ...
r
-
..
_ ..
.:.:..:...
. ...:::.:.::.:
......... . .
......
_
-
. ...... ...
..:::. .....
....:..:...
-
... ::::::......
.......... .......
..........
...... .............. .................
........... ...
....................
r
1 -
' LEGEND
INTERMAGAZINE FROM PIER 3
' INHABITED BUILDING K24
N
' Naval Weapons Station Concord Cm
Containerization Project
Figure 5.7-1 ESOD ARCS RAIL & TRUCK oN
o�
' NOT TO SCALE EXPLOSIVES HOLDING YARD Lo
0,0,
51 N°`
1
1
...........
............
.....�........".;•s::::::>::,:?;;;:a:}:;siie}}::Via°:Ec';s><..«.�?iz::'•:'`'� "=:iCe`�`:
.................. �s�
...........
... .. .. ... .. ..
............•.....................::::.; .a.3°Fig•'is«:.i:;;.s:s:'s"�'e�•"µ^¢37:?nz.ii�.�
:............
..:'.:..::.�.�:r........... ...r::.:.:�::� ........ ..............�............acs%
..........
.. ....:c....,. .... .......
ai...
xAx
tt
".:., .• .. .., to f ttr�Ftu �F<,i' 4 ��'d.� }`� fd t4 li
C:..�:ii3ucyq.:? ..ice°"^r' �a:ws' ���.r•• �ffi .�� �:��"'4�:. �°
...... �..:::::='::.. ;:c• air
r
r
a. View of Pier 3 without Gantry Cranes '
1
................:
.......... .......
..........
......::::.............
...........
..........,.
. ... .......
...::....:::
...... .....:
.........».......::..:.::::.::
•• ...... ..:::::�s:.••.............v.......•s:..:..::::::::s...'
r
......... ...
}.S
��atu
.9 m
..... .. ...... ............. ....:',...................::::::::...........
.... :............. .
. ....... ....:. ..... . :.:...: .......... .
_ r
.. .. ......... ... ....... ..
......................
... . .... ...... .
..:.:::.:.:.::::. .. . . .. ....::..:.
.:..::::... .. . ......
"t J
FP� �
a
4y
. .... ... ..... .: ....moi
....... ............:::::ass:"::�t>:::.:::£�'.::¢iu«.;;•::<...'..:::`::?:�?:<:is »� i �.e
`. w ..
a H
.......
�k...::::�,.,•;::::::- ...._... ..ate-°,
r
r
b. View of Pier 3 with Gantry Cranes ,
r
Naval Weapons Station Concord
Containerization Project o
Figure 5.8-1 VIEW OF PIER 3 FROM SUISUN BAY mN
NO
52 ,
Environmental Consequences
access roads, tracl-,work, and relocated electric introduce explosives handling activity to a
transmission lines. Although the proposed portion of the tidal area that is currently unused.
explosives holding.yard would materially alter The proposed use is consistent with existing and
the site's currently vacant appearance, these proposed uses in the tidal area, and, with the
improvements would be out of public view as planned closure of Port Chicago Highway, no
a result of the closure of Port Chicago adverse impacts on land use would occur.
Highway. No adverse visual impacts would be
expected to occur as a result of the proposed 5.9.1.2 Land Use Adjacent to the
action. Tidal Area
No Action The proposed containerization project would be
constructed at two locations in the tidal area.
The no action alternative would not have an The Station's existing explosives safety buffer
adverse impact on visual resources. zone would remain the same, and no impacts on
land uses adjacent to the tidal area would be
5.9 LAND USE expected to occur.
5.9.1 Proposed Action 5.9.1.3 Plans and Policies
Regula Framework
The Station's new mission as the West Coast .tory
terminal for containerized ammunition Th(,, two major components of the proposed
transshipment requires that the Station's containerization facilities are comparable in
out.loading capability be increased from function and general location to the facilities
240 containers of ammunition per day to described in the Station Master Plan. Studies
.520 containers per day for- a sustained period conducted since the Master Plan was approved in
of 8 days, The new mission on is an addition to 1989 have resulted in some modifications to the
the existing mission, which remains facilities as originally proposed.
unchanged. With implementation of the
proposed action, the Station's basic land use The proposed containerization project would
and functions would remain substantially the involve improvements to Pier 3 rather than to
same. The total quantity of ammunition Pier 2 as proposed by the Station Master Plan.
processed through the Station would remain and would expand the capabilities of the'
the same; however, the rate at which rail/truck explosives holding pads by providing
contaffierized arru:nunition could be processed rail access, four railcar loading docks, and an
during contingency/mobilization operations interchange yard to facilitate railcar.receiving
would be increased to achieve the objectives and inspection. These modifications have been
of the new mission. Proposed facility and designed to handle the volume of containerized
operational changes have been designed to ammunition specified (520 containers per day for
conform to existing safety restrictions, and the 8 days) within the constraints posed by existingStation's existing explosiv'es safety buffer zone conditions, safety considerations, and budget.
would remain the same.
The ESQD arcs shown in the Station Master Plan
5.9.1.1 Land Use within the Tidal incorporate the proposed facilities. Therefore.
Area the proposed facilities would be consistent with
the Station Master Plan and with one of its
The Pier 3 upgrade would improve primary objectives, that of implementing the
shiploading operations but would not change Containerization requirements in the tidal area.
the basic use of the pier, and no adverse The proposed modifications, therefore, would not
impacts on land use would occur. adversely impact implementation of the Station
Construction of the proposed explosives Master Plan.
holding yard would convert the vacant
Port Chicago townsite to holding pads, rail
tracks, docks. and other improvements and
K37303-H 53
Environmental Consequences
The proposed improvements to Pier 3 would 5.10 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
enlarge an existing facility within the Coastal
Zone. The area proposed for the explosives Pursuant to Executive Order 12898 on
holding yard and the rail yard is not within Environmental justice in Minority Populations
the Coastal Zone (Van Peeters, 1995 personal and Low Income Populations, the proposed
communication). action would not have disproportionately, high
and adverse human health or environmental
The McAteer-Petris Act, the San Francisco Bay effect on such populations including the adjacent
Plan, and other relevant documents, such as population affected by the Station and those
the Seaport Plan, comprise BCDC's approved working on the Station.
coastal management program for
San Francisco Bay. In compliance with the The proposed action would be located entirely
Coastal Zone Management Act, and within the tidal area of NWS Concord and would
concurrently with public review of this not result in a change to existing and adjacent
environmental assessment, the Navy will
land uses as discussed in Section 5.9. The
prepare and submit appropriate documentation proposed action would likely make loading and
for review by the BCDC. unloading operations at Pier 3 safer and thus
have a beneficial affect on the workers working
The proposed improvements to Pier 3 are at Pier 3.
water-oriented in nature and would conform
to BCDC's law and policies on restricting 5.11 TRANSPORTATION AND
structures to water-oriented uses. The CIRCULATION
proposed pile-supported 15' x 1200' deck
extension would constitute the minimum 5.11.1 Proposed Action
structure necessary to achieve the purpose of
the project, and no alternative upland location As stated in Section 3.1, the rate at which
exists for these improvements. The project as containerized ammunition could be processed
proposed is not expected to adversely affect through the station would increase with the
fish or estuarine/marine birds and mammals proposed action but the total amount of
(Section 5.1.2). The proposed action is ammunition processed through NIVS'Concord
consistent with policies for port/water-related would remain the same. The number of trains
industry priority uses and would not adversely and trucks entering and exiting the Station could
affect potential future use of the site for these increase over existing conditions for a brief
purposes. period (i.e., 8 days ok less), however the average
annual number of trains and trucks entering and
The installation of new piles for the Pier 3 exiting the Station would remain the same.
improvements is not considered fill by the Therefore, truck, rail, or ship traffic associated
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Franklin, 1995 with the operations at NWS Concord would, on
personal communication). the average, not change. In times of need for
rapid military ammunition transshipment there
5.9.2 No Action could be a temporary increase in truck or rail
traffic for a short duration. The majority of
The no action alternative would not have an ammunition arrives at the Station via rail.
adverse impact on land use. Under this Because of the extremely infrequent occurrence
alternative, however, one of the primary of these events and their brief duration, no
objectives of the Station Master Plan would significant transportation related impacts are
not be achieved, rendering the Station's new anticipated as a result of the proposed action.
mission infeasible.
Traffic related to construction of the proposed
action would be minor and of short duration.
There would be no significant construction
related traffic impacts as a result of the proposed
action.
K37303-H 54
Environmental Consequences
5.11.2 No Action
There would be no traffic related impacts
associated with the no action alternative.
5.12 UTILITIES
5.12.1 Proposed Action
Several utilities within the tidal area would
need to be relocated as a result of the
proposed action. A 12 W overhead electrical
transmission line would be relocated
underground. A 60 kV overhead electrical
transmission would be relocated aboveground
outside (south) of the ESQD arcs associated
with the rail and truck explosives holding
yard. A fire water pipeline and potable crater
pipeline would need to be relocated
underground and a sewer pipeline would also
need to be relocated underground. All of
these utilities would be relocated in
coordination with the appropriate utility
purveyors. The utilities would be relocated in
such a way as to provide minimal or no
disruption of service. Relocating these utilities
would be consistent with the explosive safety
distance criteria which are established to
minimize ze the potential for adverse effects to
people, structures, or the environment in case
of an accidental explosion.
Other utilities located in the vicinity of the
proposed rail and truck explosives holding
yard such as the Contra Costa Canal and
CCWD water supply pipeline are located at a
sufficient distance away from the proposed
holding yard so that they would not be
affected in the event of an accidental
explosion. The proposed CCWD new
16-inch-diameter water main along Port
Chicago Highway would also not be affected
in the event of an accidental explosion. No
significant impacts to public services or
utilities are anticipated as a result of the
proposed action.'
5.12.2 No Action
No impacts to public services or utilities
would result from the no action alternative.
K37303-H 55
Environmental Consequences
This page lefl intentionally blank.
K37303-H 56
6.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS REQUIRED BY NEPA
6.1 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE irreversible or irretrievable commitment of
IMPACTS AND resources other than the expenditure of fuel and
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS building materials during construction.
No significant unavoidable adverse impacts 6.3 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
have been identified for the proposed action or SHORT-TERM USES AND
no action alternatives. Cumulative impacts ENHANCEMENT OF
are those impacts which may be individually LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
minor, but which when combined could
contribute to an impact which could be Implementation of the proposed action would
collectively significant. There are no other enhance the long-term viability of NWS Concord.
' known planned actions in the project vicinity There will be no long-term impacts to safety or
that would create impacts which when other environmental resources with the proposed
combined with a less than significant impact action.
from the proposed action would be considered
a significant cumulative impact.
NI-NIS Concord is one of ten candidate ports of
entry identified by the U.S. Department of
Energy and U.S. Department of State in two of
the four alternatives analyzed in the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement on a Proposed
Nuclear It'eapons Nonproliferation Policy
Concerning Foreign Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel
(DOE/EIS-021.8D), March 1995. The EIS
addressed cumulative impacts, both
radiological and non-radiological, by
evaluating past. present. and reasonably
foreseeable DOE and non-DOE related
activities, in combination with the
alternatives. According to the EIS, detailed
analyses of impact topics revealed that none
would have significant environmental impacts.
The purpose of the NV1'S Concord
Containerization Project is separate and
distinct from, and unrelated to, the
Department. of Energy's proposed use of NWS
Concord as one of ten alternative receiver sites
for the transshipments of spent nuclear fuel.
6.2 IRREVERSIBLE OR
IRRETRIEVABLE
COMMITMENT OF
RESOURCES
A commitment of resources is considered
irreversible or irretrievable if it would limit
the future options for a resource. There are no
1137303-H S7
Other Considerations Required by NEPA
ThisPaS e left intentionally blank.
K37303-H ss
1
7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS
This Environmental Assessment was prepared
for the Engineering Field Activity West Subconsultants:
through Navy Cont1•act N62474-92-C-3604 by:
Basin Research Associates, Inc.
Harding Lawson Associates
105 Digital Drive Colin Busby - CWtural Resources
Novato, California 94949 Ph.D., 1978. Anthropology, University of
California, Berkeley
Persons directly involved in the preparation of M.A., Anthropology, University of California.
this document include: Berkeley
B.A., Anthropology, University of California,
David Fee - Project Manager, Air Quality, Berkeley
Hazardous Materials, Public Health and Years of Experience: 16
Safety, Transportation and Circulation,
Utilities, Other Considerations Required by Donna Garaventa - Cultural Resources
NEPA Ph.D., 1977, Anthropology, University of
M.A.. 1980, Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley
Arizona M.A., Anthropology, University of California,.
B.A., 1977, Anthropology, San Francisco State Berkeley
University B.A., Anthropology, University of California,
Years of Experience: 14 Berkeley
Years of Experience: 17
Kent julin - Biological Resources
Ph.D., 1988, Ecology, University of Independent Consultant
Washington
M.S., 1983, Forest Ecology, University of Jo Jelin - Visual and Aesthetics, Land Use,
Washington Environmental justice
B.S., 1981. Forestrv, Humboldt State Land Use Planner and Environmental Analvst
University Years of Experience: 22
Years of Experience: 7
Tim Laughlin - Biological Resources
M.S., 1986, Biology, California State
University, Los Angeles
B.S., 1980, Biology, California State
University, Los Angeles
Years of Experience: 13
Jay Mosley - Geology, Soils, and Seismicity,
Hydrology
M.S., 1983, Hydrology, Syracuse University
B.S., 1978, Geology, Bowling Green State
University
Years of Experience: 9
Eric Tattersall - Biological Resources
B.S., 1988, Biology, University of California.
Riverside
Years of Experience: 6
K37303•H 59
List of Preparers
This page left intentionally blank.
K37303-H 60
8.0 PERSONS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED
8.1 PERSONS AND AGENCIES City of Concord
CONSULTED DURING THE Department of Economic and
PREPARATION OF THIS Community Development
ENVIRONMENTAL Planning Division
ASSESSMENT 1950 Parkside Drive
Concord, California 94519
Ms. Janet Hom-righausen
U.S. Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service Contra Costa County Historical Society Center
Sacramento Field Office 1700 Oak Park Boulevard
2800 Cottage Way, Room E-1803 Pleasant Hill, California 94523
Sacramento, California 95825-1846 Ms. Betty Maffei, Mr. Andrew Young
U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Northwest Information Center of the
Service Historic Resources Information Svstem
National Register Information System Data Department of Anthropology
Base Sonoma State Universitv
P.O. Box 37127 Rohnert Park, California 94928
Washington, District of Columbia 20013-7127
Mr. Jeffrey Yokel William Self Associates
P.O. Box 2192
U.S. Department of the Interior, National Orinda, alifornia 94563
Park Service Mr. William Self
Western Region National Register Programs
600 Harrison Street, Suite 600 Mr. J. Dan Tikalsy (retired)
San Francisco, California 94107-1372 Former Public Affairs Officer
Mr. Leo Barker, Mr. Gordon Chapell, NWS Concord
Dr. Roger Kelly
U.S. Department of the Navy
Naval Weapons Station Concord
Concord, California .94520
Mr. Richard Bravo, Mr. Sam Evans
Mr. Rich Pieper, Ms. Anna Lou Proctor,
Mr. Billy Wheeler, Ms. Linda Zuckern
U.S. Department of the Navy
Engineering Field Activity, West
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
900 Commodore Drive
San Bruno, California 94066-2403
Mr. Louis S. Wall
Office of Historic Preservation
State Department of Parks and Recreation
P.O. Box 942896
Sacramento, California 94296-0001
Ms. Cynthia Howse
K3 7303-H 61
Persons and Agencies Consulted
8.2 PERSONS, AGENCIES, City of Concord
AND ORGANIZATIONS TO Economic and Community Development '
WHOM THIS Planning Division
ENVIRONMENTAL 1950 Parkside Drive
ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN Concord, California 94519
DISTRIBUTED Attention: Ms. Janet Homrighausen '
Bay Point. Municipal Advisory Council Concord High School
3105 Willow Pass Road 4200 Concord Boulevard '
Bay Point, California 94565 Concord, California 94521
Attention: Ms. Donna Enjaian
California Environmental Protection Agency
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 235 Concord Naval Weapons Station
Sacramento, California 95814 10 Delta Street, Code 092
Concord, California 94520
California Environmental Protection Agency Attention: Mr. Richard Pieper '
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Region 1 Congressman
Site Mitigation Branch Honorable George Miller
10151 Croydon Way, Suite 3 367 Civic Drive, Suite 14
Sacramento, California 95827 Pleasant Hill, California 94523
Attention: James R. Pinasco
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ,
California Office of Planning and Research 651 Pine Street
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Martinez, California 94553
Sacramento, California 95814 ,
Attention: Mr. Mike Chiriatti Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors,
District 5
California Regional Water Quality Control 300 East Leland Drive, Suite 120 '
Board Pittsburg, California 94565
San Francisco Bay Region Attention: Mr. Tom Torlakson
2101 Webster Street, Suite 500
Oakland, California 94612 Contra Costa County Community Development '
Attention: Susan Gladstone Department
651 Pine Street, 4th Floor
California Water Resources Control Board Martinez, California 94553 ,
901 P Street Attention: Mr. Jim Cuttler
Sacramento, California 95814
Attention: Mr. Phil Vintner Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District '
Chemical and Pigment Company 255 Glacier Drive
600 Nichols Road . Martinez, California 94553-4987
Pittsburg. California 94565
Contra Costa County Health Department
Clyde Civic Improvement Association 1111 Ward Street, Room 301
140 Norman Avenue Martinez, California 94553 '
Clyde, California 94520 Attention: Mr. William Grossi
Attention: Ms. Dee Kilcoyne
Contra Costa Mosquito Abatement District
155 Mason Circle ,
Concord, California 94520
K37303-H 62
Persons and Agencies Consulted
Contra Costa Times Natural Resources Defense Council
P.O. Box 5088 71 Stevenson Street, No. 1825
Walnut Creek, California 94596 San Francisco, California 94105
Attention: Mr. Gary Bogue
Office of Historic Preservation
Contra Costa Water District Post Office Box 942896
Engineering Department Sacramento, California 94296-001
2300 Stanwell, Suite A Attention: Mr. Hans Kreutzberg
P.O. Box H2O
Concord, California 94524 Pacific Gas and Electric
Attention: Ms. Lee Anne Cisterman Diablo Division
1030 Detroit Avenue
Department of Fish'and Game (3) Concord, California 94518-2487
Post Office Box 47 Attention:.Mr. Frank Eich
Yountville, California 94599
Attention: Ms. Cindy Catalano San Francisco Bay Conservation & Development
Commission
General Chemical Company 30 Van Ness Avenue, Room 2011
Bay Point Works San Francisco, California 94102
501 Nichols Road
Pittsburg, California 94565 San Francisco Chronicle
827 Broadway, Suite 340
G�%T Power Systems Inc. Oakland, California 94607
555 Nichols Road Attention: Mr. Elliot Diringer
Pittsburg, California 94565
Sierra Club
Mt. Diablo Unified School District San Francisco Bay Chapter
2701 Willow Pass Road 5237 College Avenue
Concord, California 94519 Oakland, California 94618
Mr. Pete Pederson Attention: Mr. David Nesmith
National Audubon Society State Lands Commission
Western Regional Office 1807 Thirteenth Street
555 Audubon Place Sacramento, California 95814
Sacramento, California 95825
Attention: Mr. Glenn Olson U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
San Francisco District
National Oceanic and Atmospheric 211 Main Street
Administration San Francisco, California 94105-1905
c/o U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Attention: Mr. John Hendricks
(H-1-2)
75 Hawthorne Street U.S. Department of Agriculture
San Francisco, California 94105 Soil Conservation Service
Attention: Denise Klimas 5552 Clayton Road
Concord, California 94521
Native American Heritage Commission Attention: Mr. Larry Soenen
915 Capitol Mall, Room 288
Sacramento, California 95814 U.S. Department of the Interior
Attention: Debbie Pilas-Treadway Bureau of Land Management
2800 Cottage Way
Sacramento, California
K37303-H 63
Persons and Agencies Consulted
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Federal Activity
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, California 94105
Attention: Ms. Jacqueline Wyland
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
2800 Cottage Way, Room E-1803
Sacramento, California 95825-1846
Attention: Mr. Jim Haas
U.S. Forest Service
630 Sansome Street
San Francisco, California
U.S. Navy - EFA, West (Code 09ER4)
Engineering Field Activity, West
900 Commodore Way, Building 101
San Bruno, California 94066-2402
Attention: Mr. Ronald Yee
U.S. Navy - EFA, West (Code 09ER4)
Engineering Field Activity, West
.900 Commodore Way, Building 101
San Bruno, California 94066-2402
Attention: Roy Santana,
1
K37303-H 64
9.0 REFERENCES
Anonymous Author, 1956. Typescript 2 1/4 City of Concord Department of Economic and
pages in "Response to Mr. Baldwin," in Community Development, Planning Division.
"Miscellaneous Written Materials" envelope in 1994. City of Concord General Plan, July 26,
bottom drawer of Port Chicago Room file 1994. Concord, California.
cabinet, Naval Weapons Station Concord
(WPNSTA). Collier, G.C., v.d., 1983. A Narrative History of
Contra Costa County. Super Print. El Cerrito.
Basin Research Associates, Inc., 1995.
' Cultural Resources Review, Containerization Contra Costa County Community Development
Project, Naval Weapons Station Concord, Department. 1991. Contra Costa County General
Contra Costa County, California. March. Plan 1990-2005, January 1991. Martinez,
California.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQN1D). 1985. Air Quality and Urban Cook, S.F., 1957. The Aboriginal Population of
Development. Guidelines for Assessing Impacts Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, California.
' of Project and Plans. Prepared by Air Quality University of California Anthropological Records
Management District, Planning Division. 16(4).
November.
Department of Defense (DOD), 1992. Mobility
Beck. W.A., and Y.D. Haase, 1974. Historical Requirements Study, Volume 1. January.
Atlas of California (Third Printing). University
of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Eicher, A.L., 1988. Soil-Vegetation Correlations in
Wetlands and Adjacent Uplands of the San
Bennyhoff. J.A., 1977. Ethnogeography of the Francisco Bay Estuary, California. U.S. Fish and
Plains Miwok. Center for Archaeological Wildlife Service Biological Report 88(21).
' Research at Davis Publication 5. August.
California Air Resources Board (ARB), 1992. Emanuels, G., 1986. California's Contra Costa
Area Designations for State and Federal County:An Illustrated History. Panorama West
Ambient Air Quali4i, Standards. Books, Fresno.
' California Department of Fish and Game Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 1993.
(DFG), 1988. California's Wildlife Volume I. Determining Conformity of General Federal
Reptiles and Amphibians. California Statewide Actions to State or Federal Implementation Plans;
Wildlife Habitat Relationships System. Mav 2. Final Rule. In Federal Register of November 30,
1993. 40 CFR Parts 6, 51, and 93. .Volume 58,
1990a. California's Wildlife Volume 111. Number 228.
Mammals. California Statewide Wildlife
' Habitat Relationships System. April. Federal Insurance Administration (FIA), 1977.
Flood Hazard Boundary Map, No. 90,
1990b. California's Wildlife Volume 11. Unincorporated Area, Contra Costa County,
Birds. California Statewide Wildlife Habitat California. September 6.
' Relationships System. November.
Frickstad, Walter N., 1955. Century of California
, 1994. Natural Diversity Database. Post Offices 1848 to 1954. A Philatelic Research
' Non-game Heritage Program. Search of the Society Publication, Pacific Rotaprinting
Benicia, Clayton, Cordelia, Denverton, Company, Oakland, California.
Fairfield South, Honker Bay, and Walnut
Creek 7.5-minute quadrangles.
K37303-H 65
References '
Goddard, George, 1857. Britton &Reys Map of Kyle, D.E., 1990. Historic Spots in California
the State of California. Britton and Rey, (Fourth edition of M.B. Hoover, H.E. Rensch and '
San Francisco. Reprinted by The Friends of E.G. Rensch). Stanford University Press,
the Bancroft, University of California, Stanford.
Berkeley.
Levy, R., 1978. Eastern Miwok. In California,
Gudde, Erwin G., 1974. California Place edited by R.F. Heizer, Volume 8. Handbook of
Names: The Origin and Etymology of Current North American Indians, W.G. Sturtevant,
Geographical Names third edition. University general editor, pp. 398-413. Smithsonian '
of California Press, Berkeley. Institution, Washington, D.C.
Hall, Goodhue, Haisley, Barker (HGHB), 1989. Logistics Management Institute, 1993. Army
Master Plan Naval Weapons Station Concord, Requirements for a West Coast Containerized '
Concord California. Western Division, Naval Ammunition Report, A Flow Prepositioning
Facilities Engineering Command, San Bruno. Maintenance Facility, and Watercraft
Contract N62474-86-C- 1421. Maintenance Facility. September. '
Harding Lawson Associates (HLA). 1994. Medlin, J.A., 1994. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Biological Surveys of the Port Chicago Site, Service. Letter to Kent Julin, Harding Lawson '
Naval Weapons Station, Concord. November Associates. November 23.
and December.
Miller, Mortimer K., ca. 1908-1909. Official map
Harvey & Stanley Associates, Inc. (HSA), 1986. of the City of Bay Point, Contra Costa County, '
Concord Naval Weapons Station Endangered California. Scale [ca. 1:2,1601 (W 12200111- -W
Species Section 7 Consultation Biological Data 12200111/N 3800246--N 3800246). Spect &
Reports. September. Shideler, San Francisco [between 1907 and '
1909]. R.S. Kitchener, Oakland.
Hendry, G.W., and J.N. Bowman, 1940. The
Spanish and Mexican Adobe and Other Self, W., G. Matson, C. Wills, N. Dyer, and A.
Buildings in the Nine San Francisco Bay Samuelson (Self et al.), 1993. Cultural Resources ,
Counties, 1776 to about 1850. MS on file, Overview Naval Weapons Station Concord, Contra
Bancroft Library, University of California, Costa County, California. MS on file S- 15500,
Berkeley. California Archaeological Site Inventory, Rohnert ,
Park.
Hickman, J.C. (Ed.), 1993. The Jepson Manual:
Higher Plants of California. University of Skinner, M.W., and B.M. Pavlik (eds.), 1994. '
California Press. California Native Plant Societys Inventory of•Rare
and Endangered Plants of California. California
Holland, R.F., 1986. Preliminary Descriptions Native Plant Society Special Publication No. 1
of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of (Fifth Edition). Sacramento, California. 338 pp.
California. California Department of Fish and
Game Nongame Heritage Program. October. Smitten, K.H., 1955. Appraisal of 528.80 acres,
Tidal Marsh Area [in the]••vicinity of U.S. Naval '
Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. USA), 1983. A Magazine Port Chicago, Contra Costa County,
Natural Resources Survey, Naval Weapons California.. For Twelfth Naval District. January.
Station, Concord. June ,
, 1958. Appraisal of 135,352 acres, more. or
Kroeber, A.L., 1925. Handbook of the Indians less, Tidal Marsh Area [in the] vicinity of U.S.
of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Naval Magazine Port Chicago. As of March 1958.
Bulletin 78. Government Printing Office, For Twelfth Naval District. ,
Washington, D.C.
K37303-H 66
References
South Coast Au~Quality Management District Western Division, Naval Facilities Engineering
(SCAQMD), 1993. CEQA Air Quality Command (WESTDTV). 1989. Master Plan for the
Handbook. April. Naval Weapons Station, Concord, California.
July.
Stormwater Quality Task Force, 1973.
California Storm Water Construction Activity - 1994. Wildlife Survey of Naval Weapons
Best Management Practice Handbooks. Station. Prepared by Department of
Environmental Science, Policy, and Management,
USDC-NOAH-Environmental Data and College of Natural Resources, University of
Information Service, 1993. Monthly Normals California, Berkeley. August.
of Temperature, Precipitation, and Heating and
Cooling Degree Days, 1961-1990. In Weapons Station Concord (WPNSTA) and
Climalography of the United States No. 81 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), 1984.
(California). Asheville, North Carolina: Memorandum of'Understanding Relating to
National Climatic Center. Designation of Wetland Preserve on the Naval
Weapon Station, Concord. February 1.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1901. .s
Carquinez, Calif. [Quadrangle]. Topographic
1989 Revised Preliminarv,Historic
map, 15 minute series. United States Resources Inventory, Contra Costa Countv,
Geological Survey, Menlo Park California. For the Contra Costa County
(reprinted 1926). Community Development Department in
conjunction with the Revised Contra Costa
U.S. Navy, Naval Weapons Station Concord County General Plan. Available at Contra Costa
(NWS Concord), 1987. Memorandum To: 20, County Community Development Department,
From: 09 C.Y.K. Ching. Subject: Waterfront Martinez.
Soundings. October 2.
U.S. Navy, Western Division Naval Facilities
Engineering Command. 1989. Master Plan for
the Naval Weapons Station Concord,
California, July 1989. San Bruno, California.
K17101,H 67
D
'D
m
z
�_
X
D
.1
APPENDIX A
PUBLIC NOTICE RESPONSES
i
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
i
V
i UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IX
PAO'�� 75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-3901
February 16, 1995
Mr. John Kennedy, Head
Environmental Planning Branch, EFA West
900 Commodore Drive
San Bruno, California 94066-2402
Dear Mr. Kennedy:
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has received the
requestfor scoping comments for preparation of a Draft
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Proposed Construction and
Operation of a Containerized Vessel Support System, Naval Weapons
Station, Concord, California. our review is based on the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) , the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA Implementation Regulations (40
CFR Parts 1500-1508) , and Section 309 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) .
The Naval Weapons Station Concord consists of approximately
13 , 000 acres between Suisun Bay and the northwestern portion of
Concord. The station operates an ocean terminal facility to
transport ordnance between ships and trucks or railcars. Current
loading capacity of the Station is 240 containers of ammunition
per day. Ammunition and other supplies loaded from Naval
al Weapons
Station Concord are shipped to strategic Pacific locations. In
cases of crisis, the Station would be responsible for rapidly
disseminating large amounts of ammunition and supplies. Because
of recent BRAC closures and consolidation on the west coast, the
ability of the Navy to distribute ammunition and supplies to its
Pacific locations has been reduced.
The Navy has determined that, in order to meet the
requirements of a potential crisis situation, the Station should
be capable of loading out520 containers per day for up to eight
continuous days. In order to accomplish this, the proposed
action would upgrade Ammunition Pier 3 and construct a rail and
truck
ck explosive holding yard. While increasing the emergency
loading capacity of the Station, the proposed action would not
increase the Station's normal loading operations.
The Navy has identified four primary areas of environmental
concern: biological resources; cultural resources; land use
compatibility; and, public health and safety.
Printed on Recycled Paper
Our detailed comments and recommendations are attached. We
appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed action and
request that three copies of the Draft EA be sent to this office
(mail code E-3) . Please address the documents to my attention.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (415) 744-1584 or
Jeff Philliber of my staff at (415) 744-1570.
Sincerely,
David J. Farrel, Acting Chi6f
Office of Federal Activities
2387NWSC.NO
Attachments (2)
EPA SCORING COMMENTS, NAVAL WEAPONS STATION CONCORD CONTAINERIZED VESSEL
SUPPORT SYSTEM, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. FEBRUART17. 1995.
AIRQUALITYCQMMENTS
1. The Draft EA should provide information regarding the Bay
Area Air Quality Management District's (BAAQMD) current air
quality (attainment) status. Generation of criteria pollutants
at the Station expected under the proposed Action should be
analyzed in the context of that attainment status. The Draft EA
should address the following, as appropriate:
existing air quality conditions, problems and planning;
- potential air quality impacts from the proposed action;
- conformity with the State Implementation Plan (SIP) , if
applicable;
- air quality mitigation measures;
asures; and,
- project alternatives, including alternatives that minimize
air quality impacts.
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 176 (c) of the Clean
Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 7506 (c) , Federal agencies are
prohibited from engaging in or supporting in any way an action or
activity that does not conform to an applicable State
implementation plan. Conformity to an ' implementation plan means
conformity to an implementation plan's purpose of eliminating or
reducing the severity and number of violations of the national
ambient air quality standards and achieving expeditious
attainment of such standards. EPA has promulgated regulations at
58 Federal Register 63214 (November 30, 1993) implementing
Section 176 (c) . Among other things, these regulations establish
de minimis levels for actions requiring conformity
determinations, exempt certain actions from conformity
determinations, and create criteria and procedures that Federal
agencies must follow for actions required to have conformity
determinations. the Navy should review these regulations and
discuss their applicability in the Draft EA. If the Navy has any
questions regarding these or other conformity requirements,
please contact Bob Pallarino of the EPA Air and Toxics Division
at (415) 744-1212.
'WETLANDS AND WATER QUALITY RESOURCES
1. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should be contacted to
determine the need for a Section 404 discharge permit. If a
permit is required, EPA will review the proposed project for
compliance with the Federal Guidelines (40 CFR 230) promulgated
pursuant to Section 404 (b) (1) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) . In
keeping with the national goal of "no net loss" of wetlands, the
Draft EA should consider alternatives that will preserve wetland
resources.
EPA SCOPING COMMENTS, NAVAL WEAPONS STATION CONCORD CONTAINERIZED VESSEL
SUPPORT SYSTEM, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FEBRUARY 17, 1995.
To comply with the Guidelines, the proposed project must
meet all of the following criteria:
There is no practicable alternative to the proposed
discharge which would have less adverse impact on the
aquatic ecosystem (40 CFR 230. 1 (a) ) .
The proposed project will not cause or contribute to
significant degradation of waters of the United States,
including wetlands (40 CFR 230. 1(c) ) . Significant,
degradation includes loss of fish and wildlife habitat,
including cumulative losses.
The proposed project does not violate water quality
standards, toxic effluent standards, or jeopardize the
continued existence of federally listed species or
their critical habitat (40 CFR 230. 10 (b) ) .
All appropriate and practicable steps are taken to
minimize adverse impacts on the aquatic ecosystem
(i.e. , mitigation) (40 CFR 320. 10 (d) ) . This includes
incorporation of all appropriate and practicable
compensation measures for avoidable losses to waters of
the United States, including wetlands.
To characterize baseline conditions within the project area,
the Draft EA should include maps, text, and tables that feature
areas occupied by wetlands, aquatic systems, and non-wetland
riparian habitat. Direct, indirect and cumulative impacts to
these resources should also be fully described in the Draft EA.
If wetlands are affected, the Draft EA should contain a
mitigation plan that assures no net loss of wetland or riparian
functions, values, and acreage. Areas that may already qualify
as wetland/riparian habitat are not generally considered by EPA
to be suitable for use as mitigation areas. Although encouraged
by EPA, enhancement of existing wetland and riparian habitat is
not in itself sufficient mitigation .to meet the "no net loss"
goal.
2. The Draft EA should ensure that the proposed development and
reuse would not affect the Department of Defense's obligation to
meet water quality standards. The Draft EA should describe
existing treatment facilities and National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits and should discuss any need
for additional facilities and permits to meet the needs of the
proposed project.
. 2
EPA SCOPING COMMENTS, NAVAL WEAPONS STATION CONCORD CONTAINERIZED VESSEL
SUPPORT SYSTEM, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FEBRUARY 17, 1995.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES COMMENTS
1. The Navy should conduct all necessary field surveys and
consult with appropriate state and federal agencies, including
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in determining the range of
species that could be affected by the action.
2. Naval Weapons Station Concord is in close proximity to
sensitive biological, habitats, including wetlands and' suisun Bay.
The. Draft EA should include a description of such areas in
relation to the Station, and determine the potential magnitude of
project-related construction and/or increased loading impacts.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES COMMENTS
1. The Draft EA should include a discussion of pollution
prevention and energy conservation opportunities related to Naval
Weapons Station Concord's proposed actions. It is the EPA's
position that such opportunities should be integrated into the
analysis as part of the physical and economic aspects of the
proposed action.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMENTS
1. The Draft EA should identify Naval Weapons Station Concord's
hazardous materials storage, disposal and contamination history
as relevant to the siting of the proposed rail and truck
explosive holding yard.
2 . The Draft EA should include detailed descriptions of
proposed efforts to remove hazardous waste and contamination from
the site. Attention should be given to substances that can be or
have been released into the adjacent aquatic and terrestrial
environment. Such substances could include petroleum-based
products, explosive ordinance and lead fragments, battlefield
chemicals, household chemicals, etc.
NEPA COMMENTS
1. The Draft EA should demonstrate the need for the proposed
improvements at Naval Weapons Station Concord as opposed to
improving installations elsewhere on the west coast. The Draft
EA should demonstrate that the Navy has considered various
alternatives to the proposed action.
2. In keeping with the Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions
to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-
Income Populations (EO 12898) , the Draft EA should describe the
3
EPA SCOPING COMMENTS. NAVAL WEAPONS STATION CONCORD CONTAINERIZED VESSEL
SUPPORT SYSTEM, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, FEBRUARY 17, 1995.
measures taken by the Navy to: 1) fully analyze the
environmental effects of the proposed Federal action on minority
communities and low-income populations, and 2) present
opportunities for affected communities to provide input into the
NEPA process. The intent and requirements of� EO 12898 are
clearly illustrated in the President's February 11, 1994
Memorandum for the Heads of all departments and Agencies,
attached.
3. The Draft EA should include an analysis of potential
cumulative effects in the Station's "Region of Influence" (ROI) .
(The ROI is the area surrounding the site that would be
measurably affected by various components of the proposed
action) . According to 40 CFR 1508.7, 11 (c)umulative impacts can
result from individually minor but collectively significant
actions taking place over a period of time. " The Draft EA
cumulative impacts analysis should include "the incremental
impact of the action when added to other past, present and
reasonably foreseeable future actions. " A description of all
relevant planned, pending and approved projects in the ROI should
be. presented along with a map illustrating the locations of those
projects. The incremental effects of the proposed action should
then be added to other expected development effects in the region
to determine cumulative impacts.
GENERAL COMMENTS
1. The Draft EA should define significance criteria as they are
applied to the impact analysis. Impacts should be clearly-stated
along with their level-of-significance. Mitigation Measures .
should correspond to specific impacts.
2. The Draft EA should clearly define and describe "baseline"
conditions. Baseline conditions should be those conditions that
exist at the Station immediately prior to project commencement.
Positive and negative impacts should be assessed by comparing
future conditions projected under the proposed Action to those
baseline conditions established in the Draft EA. Baseline
conditions should be used consistently throughout the document as
a basis for impacts analysis.
-
4
f'
1 THE WHITE HOUSE
WA3F11.-1GTON
rFeb:nary Il, 1994
MLw-0RA.N=67M FOR rZ�Ei D S ro
F�A7 OP ALL D�_ARTMEN':S AND AGLNCIZS
' S'UB,iT Executive Order' on Federal Actions to Add-Tess
EnviroLtMtal Justice in Minority Populations
and Low-Income Populations
Today I have issued an Executive order on Federal Actions
I to Address Environmental 7u.stice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations. That order is designed to focus Fade:-al
attention on the environmental and human health conditions in
minority communities and low-income co==nities with the goal
of achieving environmental justice. That order is also intended
to promote nondiscrimination in Federal programs substantially
affecting humin health and the environment, and to provide
1 minority communities and low-income communities access to public
information on, and = opportunity for public participation -_
matters relating to human health or the environment.
The purpose of this ss arate memorandum is to underscore cereal:
provision of- existing law that can help ensure that all
ties and persons across this Nation live in a safe and hea:th!-:1
' env;,rnament. Eavironmental and civil rights statutes provide
many opportunities to address environmental hazards in minority
coammunities and low-income communities. Application of these
1 existing statutory provisions is an important part of this
Administration,3 .off orts to prevent those minority co =zLes
and low-income con unities from being subject to- dispropor-
tionately high and adverse environmental effects.
I am therefore today directing that all department and agency
:leads take appropriate and necessary steps to ensure that _te
following specific directives are implemented immediately:
In accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of :964 .
each Federal agency shall ensure that all programer or actio-.: .es
receiving Federal financial assistance that affect human hea:.h
or the' environment do not directly, or through contractual ::
other arrangements, use criteria, methods, or practices t=at
discriminate on the basis ;f race, color, or national orifi
2
Zach =Federal agency stall analyze the environmental ef-Facts ,
incl;:ding human health, economic and Social effects, of
.Federal actions, Including effects on minority communities ,
and low-income co=unicies, when such analysis is required by
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1.969 (NEPA) , 42 11. S . C.-
section 4321 et- te. Mitigation measures outlined or analyzed*
nalyzed r
in an environmental assessment, environmental impact statement,
or record of decision, whenever feasible, should address
significant and adverse environmental effects of proposed ,
'ederal actions on minority commmities and low-income
cor�unitias .
Each Federal agency shall provide opportunities for cc=unicy ,
input in the NEPA process, including identifying potential-
J effects and mitigation measures in consultation with affected
communities and improving the accessibility of meetings, c_'v cial
documents, and notices.
The Environmental Protection Agency, when reviewing
environmental effects of proposed action of other Federal
agencies under section 309 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C.
✓ section 7609, shall ensure that' the involved agency has fully
analyzed environmental effects on minority co=m=ities and
low-income co= nities, including human health, social, and
economic effects. *
Each Federal agency shall ensure that the '
g cY public, �.nclud_ag
minority communities and low-income communities, has adegzate
access to public information relating to human health or
environmentulplanning, regulations, and ongorcement when
required under the Preedom of Information Act, 5 II.S.C.
Section 552, the Sunshine Act, 5 Q.S.C. 9Qetion 552b, and the '
Emergency Plar i27g and Community Right-to-Know Act, 42 ':. S .
section 11044.
This memorandum is intended only, to improve the interna:
management of the Executive Branch and is not intended :o. '
nor does it create, any right, benefit, or tr"}st respcns ioi:i:y,
substantive or procedural, enforceable at law Ior equity zy a
party against the United States, its agencies, its off iters .
or any person.
I '
' S i f.Tt'. OF CALIFORNIA PETE WILSON, Governor
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL- BOARD Pname:(5101 268-1286
SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION Fax; (510) 286.1380
2101 WEBSTF.R STRFET, SURF 500 BBS f6f0)286-0404
OAKLAND 94812 February 27, 1995
File No. 2119.1142(sfg)
VIA FAX 415-244-3737
Sam Dennis p
Supervisor, Land/Air Section --
Department of the Navy
EFA, West
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
900 Commodore Drive
San Bruno, CA 94066-2402
Subject: Open Public Scopfng Period In Preparing an Environmental Assessment
' for the Construction and Operation of a Containerized Vessel Support
System
Dear Mr. Dennis:
This is in response to your open letter dated Janus 19 1995 on the subject Environmental
Ae N �
Impact Assessment. Staff of the Regional Water Quality'Control Board (RWQCB) have
reviewed the scoping proposal and have a few minor points regarding the project. From the
RWQCB perspective, there are two issues which should be addressed; those relating to the
Superfund remedial investigation and underground storage tank activities and secondly,
I permits required for protection of water quality and the aquatic habitats of Seat Creek, Suisun
Bay and adjacent wetlands.
In general, RWQCB staff suggest that your office coordinate with the Environmental
Restoration section of EFA, West to ensure that the site investigation and remediation of
hazardous wastes under CERCLA will not affect or be affected by your project, This may be
particularly relevant in terns of construction activities and the presence of potentially
contaminated soil and/or groundwater. Please contact me at 510-286-0840 if you have
questions regarding the RWQCB oversight of the remedial investigation or leaking
underground storage tank activities.
In terms of water quality protection during construction activities, if the upgrading of the
Ammunition Pier 3 requires a US Corps of Engineers permit under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act, the RWQCB must certify that the Corps' permit complies with water quality
standards, or waive such certifications. If not waived, the certification can be granted or
denied. If two or more acres of wetlands are affected, the recommendation to State Water
Resources Control Board on granting or denial of certification must be voted on by the
Regional Board in a public hearing. However, if the area is less than two acres, certification
can be handled administratively.
If wetlands would be affected at any time during implementation of the plan, the RWQCB's
wetland fill policy should be noted. The policy requires no not loss of wetland acreage and no
net loss of wetland value. Mitigation may be rquired to compensate For the destruction of
wetlands, preferably in-kind and onsite with no destruction of habitat value.
In addition, if the project disturbs a land area equal to or greater than five acres, you will be
j � 9
required to file a Notice of Intent to seek coverage under the statewide general construction
permit. The permit requires the preparation of a stormwater pollution prevention plan,
addressing erosion control and runoff during construction and longterm measures for runoff
control following the completion of construction. Please contact Martin Musonge of the
Watershed Management Division in this office at 510-286-4264 R you have questions
regarding these requirements.
Please include me on your mailing list at the above address for future correspondence on this i
project. ■
Sincerely,
Susan Glads ne
Remedial Project Manager
Groundwater Protection Division
Federal Facilities Section
x: Barbara Smith, Remedial Project Manager
US EPA, Federal Facilities Section
James Pinasco, Remedial Project Manager
CAL-EPA, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Office of Military Affairs
1
ZliAli CF"iFORNLA -THE RESOURCES AGENCY 11 FETE wr_sopi, cavemol,
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
POST OFFICE BOX 47
YOUN71VILLE. CALIFORNIA "699
(70")9".SS00
February 28, 1995
Mr. Sam Dennis
Department of the Navy
Engineering Field Activity, West
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
900 Commodore Drive
San Bruno, California 94066-2402
Dear Mr. Dennis :
Open Public Scoping Period in Preparing an
Environmental Assessment for the Construction and
Operation of a Containerized Vessel Support System
Department of Fish and Game personnel have reviewed the subject
project in Concord, Contra Costa County. Due to personnel and time
limitations for project review, we are unable to identify specific
concerns to be addressed in the Environmental Assessment (EA) .
The EA should address all potential impacts to biotic resources
and mitigation measures, as well as alternatives which would avoid
impacts. . We request that subsequent documents related to this project
be submitted for our review.
The Department recommends the following overall measures to
lessen or minimize impacts.
1 . Avoidance or minimization of impacts to important wildlife
habitats; i. e. , oak woodland, wetlands, streams, riparian
corridor, and habitat for sensitive plant and animal species .
2 . Revegetation using native species .
3 . Conformance with the Department Wetland Policy which requires no
net loss of either wetland acreage or habitat value for
unavoidable impacts.
The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers also has jurisdiction over
the discharge of fill to streams and wetlands under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act . We recommend that the Corps be contacted to
determine if they have jurisdiction and require a permit.
if you have any questions concerning our comments, please
contact Carl Wilcox, Environmental Services Supervisor, at
(707) 944-5525.
Sincerely,
Acting egional Manager
Region 3
TOTAL PAGE.02
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
+ ' Region 3 Headquarters
P. O. Box 47 , Yountville CA 94599
5 7329 Silverado Trail, Napa CA 94558
(707) 944-5500 • ATSS 547-5500
FAX (707) 944-5563 ' ATSS 547-SS 63
DATE; I - =----- PAGE 1 of
THIS FAX IS BEING SENT TO:
(Full Name)
(Office}
(Telephone)
FROM:
(Name)
(Telephone)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: i
STATE OF CALIFORNIA PETE WILSON,Governor
SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
THIRTY VAN NESS AVENUE, SUITE 2011
SAN FRANCISCO,CALIFORNIA 94102-6080
PHONE: (415)557.3686
February 10, 1995
Mr. Sam Dennis
Supervisor,Land/Air Section
Department of the Navy
Engineering Field Activity, West
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
900 Commodore Drive
San Bruno, California 94066-2402
SUBJECT: Environment Assessment for Containerized Vessel
Support System, Concord Naval Weapons Station
(BCDC Inquiry File No. CC.WD.7209.3)
Dear Mr. Dennis:
Thank you for transmitting the notice of the open public scoping period in preparing an
Environment Assessment for the construction and operation of Containerized Vessel Support
System at the Concord Naval Weapons Station in Contra Costa County. While the Commission
has not had an opportunity to review and comment on the notice, the staff has read the materials
accompanying the notice and has the following comments.
C�
First, the proposed pier and yard improvements appear to be water-oriented in nature and, as
such, would likely conform to the Commission's law and policies on restricting fill to water-
oriented uses. However, it is not clear whether any fill in tidal areas of the Bay would be necessary
for the holding yard. The environmental assessment should clearly delineate all areas of tidal
action, all tidal marshes, and other non-tidal wetlands which may be affected by the proposed pro-
ject. In addition, the Commission's law and policies require that all flu be the minimum amount
necessary to achieve the purpose of the project, that no alternative upland location exists for that
portion of the project proposed on fill (including pile-supported structures), that adverse impacts
from any fill on fish and wildlife resources, water quality, marshes and mudflats, among other
things, be minimized, and that any significant Bay fills be mitigated. The environmen!J assess-
ment should address how the proposed project is consistent with these policies.
The Concord Naval Weapons Station is indicated on the San Francisco Bay Plan and San
Francisco Bay Area Seaport Plan Maps as a port/water-related industry priority use area, if and
when no longer needed by the military. A Bay Plan note further indicates that"Port and industrial
use should be restricted so that they do not adversely affect marshes."The environmental assess-
ment should also address how the proposed project would affect a potential future use of the site
for port or water-related industrial purposes.
As you may know, under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, federal agencies
proposing to undertake projects, such as the one described in the Notice, that may have an affect
on the coastal zone of a state with an approved coastal management program must submit a deter-
Dedicated to making San Francisco Bay better.
Mr. Sam Dennis
February 10, 1995
Page 2
mination to the State coastal management agency that the proposed project is consistent with that
state's coastal management program. The McAteer-Petris Act and the San Francisco Bay Plan,
among other things, comprise the Commission's approved coastal management program for San
Francisco Bay. Thus, once the environmental assessment has been finalized and the Navy has
more fully developed this proposal,it should submit to the Commission a determination that indi-
cates how the proposed project is consistent with the Commission's coastal management program.
The Commission will then agree or disagree with that determination.
We hope these preliminary comments will help in producing an environmental assessment
which meets the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. We will provide more
detailed comments; on the project when the environmental assessment is circulated. If you have any
questions about the consistency review process, please call me.
Sinc__e_r�l
Y9
STEVE/A. McADAM
Assistant Executive Director
SAM/mm
Transmittal Memo 7672 me
From
��hr� nn�ol t : 14r�-- ..1ef
(my
Oa r,
¢tion 8 r(�n O LocataC �r� Dept.Cnarge
�J h
' '`{($-av`f 7siep Fax# Te *-6-7q
e-6-7q -9/0 0
ComnanL, Original D¢Slrpy R urn Cain for pickup
� � Di¢pos uon
—oo` CONTRA COSTA
WATER DISTRICT
1331 Concord Avenue
P.O.Box H2O
ConcorQ.CA 94524
(510)674-8000 FAX(510)674-8122
' February 23, 1995
Sent by Facsimile
Directors (415) 244-3737
t"r.e
ph L.Campbell
esbenr John Kennedy, Head
Erzabetn R.Ane110 Environmental Planning Branch
Vice Pres,cent U. S. Department of the Navy
�ette Boatmun Engineering Field Activity, West
en=to P.Fraiias 900 Commodore Drive
aures Preni San Bruno, California 94066-2402
Waller J Bishop
�enere/Manager Subject: Naval Weapons Station Concord,'Proposed Containerization Project -
Open Public Scoping Period in Preparing an Environmental Assessment
Dear Mr. Kennedy:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on notice to prepare an Environmental Assessment
(EA) on the proposed Containerization Project (Project) at the Concord Naval Weapons
Station. The Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) comment covers public health and safety
issues identified in the preliminary analysis. The Project is within the existing CCWD service
area boundaries..
The Concord Naval Weapons Station is increasing its outload capability for a sustained eight
day period. The portion of the Project addressed by these comments is the Rail and Truck
Explosive Holding Yard proposed within the Potential Development Envelope located between
Port Chicago Highway on the south and several railroads on the north (from Conceptual Site
Plan).
' Two issues that need to be addressed in the EA documentation are:
1. Contra Costa Canal and water �flly safety in the event of an gZ21osion or other accident
(e.g., rail car derailment). The Contra Costa Canal, owned by the U.S.Bureau of Reclamation
and operated and maintained by CCWD, is located approximately 500 feet south of the
closest typical holding pad depicted in the Conceptual Site Plan. The Canal provides raw
water supply for treatment to approximately 200,000 residential customers in central Contra
Costa County at the nearby Bollman Treatment Plant north of the City of Concord and for
industrial (i.e., Shell Oil Company and Tosco Refining Company), municipal, commercial
and irrigation users as well as the Naval Weapons Station. Please address the adequacy of
earth barricades (as shown in Exhibit 13, attached to the notice)to contain accidental events
from impacting the Contra Costa Canal and CCWD water supply services. Please address
emergency response capabilities and plans for coordination with CCWD that would be
employed in the event of an accident.
2_ Project construction relationship to CCWD'c existing and pro-posed watertrans-
facilities in the Port Chicago Hi6w Xxjght-of-way. The notice indicates the Project would
require relocation of[existing] electric and water transmission lines. The CCWD plains to
install a 16-inch diameter treated water main in the Port Chicago Highway right-of-way to
serve the Bay Point community to the east(see enclosed Bay Point Pipeline Alignment,
Mr. John Kennedy
February 23, 1995
Page 2
Figure 1). Construction is proposed to start in December 1995 with completion in
September 1996. Please indicate any potential Project impacts on CCWD's existing and
proposed water transmission facilities, CCVVD's accessibility to service such facilities and
emergency response plans.
If you have any questions on the comments or require further information on the CCArD
including existing facility locations and/or the Bay Point Pipeline Project and emergency
response plans, please contact Dennis Pisila, Senior Planner at 674-8119.
Sincerely,
Arthur R. Jensen.
Director of Planning
Enclosure: Bay Point Pipeline Alignment,Figure I
cc: Michael Salazar, CCWD Risk Management Officer
ARJ/DP
OIN q CI % I:
(510)6-11-3381
NI:S 24
(i 10)671-3162
IL' OU-
February 9, 1995
John Kennedy
Head, Environmental Planning Branch
EFA West
900 Commodore Drive
San Bruno, CA 94066
Subject: Naval Weapons Station Concord Proposed Containerization Project
Dear Mr. Kennedv:
We have reviewed information regarding this project. Please identify any changes to explosive
safety zones previously established. Please send copies of future documents related to this
project to us.
Sincerely,
Janet Homrighausen, AICP
Associate Planner
JH:mmm
;D
'D
!n
i7
X
co
1
1
APPENDIX B
' BIOLOGICAL DATA
i
r
i
-c
r
� L
ct
I f;
m c T G rc ti a r G, r
ct
CID
3 ? 3 �'
^G LG pGcc 7 r
O
r
T
b.
tc
Ic
�.�. ✓ow
5.
y. ti
�v d t4 r'L
�'
d Cl., G N
th
L oc
fir= CL G
G
cI:
5
(v N
(f
a
;� o r
72
ra fA
O'D
0 0
0 10
IL
40
:r0 CL
n Ln z n n n Z
0 0
Q) n co-
Ci
zi FS
Z
Ye K
ID
IV
a) cr
C: CX
cz
YAC X X
> C) C:
Z
C'- m mr cc
cz
tr
cli
CL
C
C
C cu
6;5
cc �r
T z
C:
rZ
—cc
L;
0 0
C
C-1
0 0
tr tr
U
CA
cc 0 0
m. > MCI
E Z. *C; = C, -
0 0
—cz
t CL U
ca CZ
0 4) Co C a-
cc
Ct
0
Cl) > U
C
cc
CL v >
en eq eq LN
r 1
C3
Q CL z:
cc t�c C.)
to
va
L4 cr;
C:
CC
cr
�
C) m c 0 —tt rz cz m
C� c
Z
C m
Zcccz
- cv. ct
0 cv ,M 0 cz
cz
C
x x
c) CLI
C;
ct:
57
tr.
cz C cq ;z
tr. tr Z
L C5
M
Cl)
5z
0 0
CL f.) :t
-�t L
cinC3
CF
0 c
I
M 0
c
0
tc. et
'E0 0.U 0
— Z� =
u C3 .7
> U
c cc r = .= ct
;_ 7 C: M
Cb
elleq
I—
IZ V, V,
C,
Z
E cc
Z
U
co
cz cr,
Z
f�
� Y
L cc C r" ✓ r
'r„ ^" r 'V p. r".. T r •l. '... tict y
wS r C 7 ti i
cc
ti
GYcc, cc
= 33 v L Z
c�
d 3 •-
C Yct r �. r
' y ' '� ✓ �' T 1. �O b �' � Jz v: :. y `'s •^
IiEh
c
C 7 ti r r.
o d v 7e ct l V
v
y o �✓ r ti
C _
5-1 cr
d .✓ Y .yG v •i r
v
40
s: � 3
v CsCD
cr-
is
N � U
o• � r � r v' � •�
a _ f
r C
C
.'• 2 w
G ZI �. `�' .ti c.
' n pi ti ✓ i 1^ "' r
C
a
v Z r vJ C
ctZ5
C C)
cG x C-
c c c
Z z z
r, CU
C, co
tt V,
0 Z 00
C)
Z u
tr
ro
C)
C:)
c-
z U:, c.
ci
0 0
icyc z
e.. ca
(3
e 2�
c 0 c
0 — = M V.
.c w V.
a 0
C
0 ca
tc tc.
0 0
0 ca
r.L L)
4 ca
s
m CU M
m
cz CT
L:
CZ n
> c
cr;
CN
CIO
Z z
Qz.
cn
A-Z -rz
cl, CC
cu
c (1;, a; cu
z
cc
r- c *=
lu
E
Cl
m
—cz W rl
to
. G r'•^. ~ G � H
w� Y
G-
1
f V
Ac % cs C?. '25 y 4 w C L
ct
CCrCr. IMC r G
fr
a.Q V ar.. C: r �^ N
•„
E00
NC = = c
O Ce^r = -^ C aD
= m ��, 7 v tr
!:or v. tt
, v a G 3 c
cC 7 = C:
Z fvtrJ
U
¢• U t N v
r N v Ci
>• � � .v�.' � �+...,� Rte+ � i., C � •-.
a
v: ° Z
`> v.
Z
G 44 zct
� r
G G O y r
G — ct 3 ..
to
1
El El
7r � tj ,y� ❑
00
„3
OD
-7 ^7 7 cn C" m
N
�^ c > cn ;Jy TC J: cn V
v (D
� 0
7c v Q Q N n
12C/) go
tD
:!:
u N =
Cn
-y t}
1 _
?� cy "
htz
rn T ^7 y»
C 7
z .n' CC z
X ?rot
c
c c
Y C G
L f n OG i Y
i G
N
r
zr
f
r rl G
i
d �p 't3 •tis„ � cy ..� c` -�..-
rNsy„d0 0
G
U.
rV. ! i �"
G �
Its
t6 r C 1. r;,
_ .y .. „•• y,.
ct
i •"' "� �- cv-
r a ...
i
y
r N
U
N V.
In
un, 11
r �
= Z
C!: i
c
r .
I
v I
r C
r c 3 .-
-� p ? •=
'f
G •'• i S ,.7L N � Cfi
CC+
DAC F U
C Z G G % pp r G-
F
G L U S V G �•�, G t r G 'G �, v. 7
l ti
r G-
.Y V G Z .
v T cC G U v
c: T u
cam.,
v C.• G v v cC C r �, .. r C I
cc
V. I
= •-
N � aV l.
ca � U � ti
y
CC
a �
s r = I
r G n G G f,, G
C ... a 0 G- G v, Cl. V
cc
a S cs
O o
-" Z G ) U
d ; v U U
it U
CL C U
CL z
Gv O C G •-•
� U �
U cc
Z C V J C h
C
—150
"C G
3 w r
tt r G eucc
C oA G —•
i
F
w
cr-
1;
C4
p u is
lz
Z
21
-tr
z
X
:4 C:
' _ .., v:- .i _ .. Z Ste" � .�'� c� ..
cr
tc Q:
C m
dc W. cc
M
cc
5z
o 0
aspEo ca
L) U
cn CF
Qi
0 0'
ca
D. *E 0 0
CD Co
41 cC M
Cl) > U
tr� cr cr. cz
m
CD r:
ca CU eq CN
TZ
CZ
Cold
CLC. Z.
Ud cr
= 0
c z M
L;
00
yc
CC
y �
c
ti 3
Z y
a:
C C r_
d.Q G
N7� �U y � vC � yC
l6 r C i T
U "�
C O G N + v v r
w 7,ti.r' O L
t4 G C:V .Y v � •- %��.- :n
c
r
tL r: J
N v
r Y
il; ••
V
a
Cl% V:
� 5
G ;L
� J
r
� � C
Uct `
U �`
a;.
Y
G
cc
G ry' �, r
O > G,
to K v+ r
cc Z r
C'. . cc
y r
G r.
G ? c:
tz
CC
; 3 c
(A r
d C ' c.
—00
Y r y
V: G
ct
� Y v
r
r
ti
w c
r
�' J L �' d ' i •fC � DQ v � r^
G
Gct
U U i
p
� G G o 7 co �' r, v •c
N T p V r C �i U v •F r
Cc
w N10
.✓ r r- p
s ✓
to 7 7 'rC. G G i i v rJ Y
s � V
V �
r
A
t's
✓ tG �� C
i t4 v, r
r
d �J v
c
Y r.
r G v , iC �. "C r
r C C w v
' J ? cc
.'—
cz
x
C ^ 7 G v.'
ell
YCl. ct
G _
Ell
N r 0 ..•. C y J:.. c�
IC
�► -ter, G:, V. ter, '' .- ..c��Jjj
0• cp
� ,
3;
trl
,r J
tn
CZ
ct
' G
r
r
C V: 5 n
r I W
-4
C � •r �" �,, Q
. c G ccct
{r
v.
y U �
^G r fr U Yt C Z
w
C-.
cJ OG U G^ C"r' G
v yT G2' rn %�; y C T
ccCi. �( F. +.+ Lco
D U ^C x 5 ` G G> C
G7 v G- M
'C, �• G. 3 � y T C G � � �
ct
C- v v v:
•Y', i r rJ v E i f ryVO
y w U G v Es CG m
r f. 'v:
VO
G _ -= G ^ cs
a Q 0 ,,. G •,. r Ci v G G tv c. � G
G
lro-
15
S
tA
Ao
r x
00 d c G,
c
U C F
ccs c v. _
1�" 2• � 4' U. r .i
U 7
' � N
r ., ✓
y �
c � G � c •_
I• •N P �. � Cl !
n rr+ r
% y
<. r" fir; lt% ✓ r r.,
,Y,�, -- .-' `.� e' '' U. `-'• 3 1. _
is ,-; ; U• _ .••• +' ":- � C►
01
a '
N T 00 ✓ ✓f U. G ^� J r w
N
G �p j C '' ��', v-. � `e 'G,'J � r! � ofJ.r ✓T
40
It
v r �, •� ,� G G � c,,r+•,,,,, •v c; % 4
� � �.� �• rC � ^ OU y G i.� 1
• GISy ti v v. G
i Z- Ii L ��;,. J "' "�" " CSG i i, U"••+
/ Y r d
y N J 3
r
r
�G
y
G
•V G: v 'C �
•7 r %,L �, J G,
v G ✓ ��
Gv Gam' : G
p
� f✓ C i V ti � t'r, �
r
G m ':. :•. G � �. C� c6 a:
O r TG NC`, s, G' 7, � •�� 4
"' G i J r C I ✓� C; r
C1 y cc c1:,• v 7•"y � ti �, G �
s,It
Q Gas
Cl
00
00
CC
�jw a
�t6 y � (,� V v J• L � r ✓ rf Gee � �. ''• r„ � � G G ...+
N Z = v. C � titi v � � c: ✓ cn 'sv � c
v d C .s 7.. a G V cl•
fl' G,• �., v � •�„ j 'r�'�+ ti P � ea ti ,.+ 71
PCs
y, ..: G Li ��, •C,,v � y �; G �,G^�O �; �.y �r� r-, v:
'�v ca � v. c �, ca - `ob t,V. P •- d c- v, ,V.'
O�� '�. i � ti i t) "'',' j j OY '.� ti "i• � ` G CGG :% Y
QCs. % � �, �•� � 'oo :�'� ��•`a,, CJ`� � � �•
C C 0? ty ! C'
T y G+tJVY
r tn
v
r ,
C.
c v
o � '
� c
r
O �
•-
m ti p
N T 0 y t G
N Z V v
a m� Oma^• " v. " C
N Z 7
v ct .r. w F
m J v ti 3 v
c
y S r
11
r N
y v �
D
'�
m
z
o_
X
n
1
APPENDIX C
CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
CONTAINERIZATION PROJECT, NAVAL WEAPONS STATION CONCORD,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
FOR
HARDING LAWSON ASSOCIATES
105 Digital Drive
Novato, CA 94949
ATTN: Mr. David Fee
1
BY
IN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES,, INC.
14731 Catalina Street
San Leandro, California 94577
FEBRUARY 1995
REVISED MARCH 1995
�r
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 1
3.0 SOURCES CONSULTED 2
3.1 RESEARCH SOURCES 2
3.2 INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS 2
4.0 BACKGROUND 2-9
4.1 NATIVE AMERICAN 3-4
4.1A Prehistoric 3
4.1 B Ethnographic 3-4
4.2 HISTORIC PERIOD 4-9
4.2A Hispanic Period 4
4.2B American Period 4-9
Seal Bluff Landing. Baypoint and Port Chicago 4-7
World War II to the Present 7-9
5.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD REVIEW 9-12
5.1 PREVIOUS RESEARCH AND CULTURAL SENSITIVITY 9-10
5.2 CURRENT PROJECT INVENTORY AND OBSERVATIONS 10-11
5.2A Current Setting 11
5.2B Surface Observations 12
5.2C Artifacts 12
6.0 FINDINGS 12-14
6.1 ARCHITECTURAL 12-13
Town of Port Chicago 12-13
Pier 3 13
6.2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL 13
Town of Port Chicago 13
Pier 3 13
6.3 OTHER CULTURAL RESOURCES 13-14
7.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14
8.0 REFERENCES CITED AND CONSULTED 15-26
9.0 ATTACHMENTS
9.1 APPENDIX 1: FIGURES
' FIGURE 1 GENERAL PROJECT LOCATION
FIGURE 2 PROJECT AREA LOCATION
,, a BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
9.0 ATTACHMENTS, con't �.
9.1 APPENDIX I: FIGURES, con't
FIGURE 3 PROJECT AREA IN 1914 (C.F. Weber & Co. 1914)
FIGURE 4A SANBORN INSURANCE MAP AREAS ((USGS Vine Hill,
Calif. 1951 with Miller ca. 1908-1909, Sanborn 1912, 1919,
1925, 1945; HLA 1994b)
FIGURE 4B SCHEMATIC- SANBORN INSURANCE MAP AREAS
((USGS Vine Hill, Calif. 1951 with Miller ca. 1908-1909,
Sanborn 1912, 1919, 1925, 1945; HLA 1994b)
9.2 APPENDIX II: LISTS
LIST II-1 INDIVIDUALS, GROUPS, AND AGENCIES CONTACTED
LIST II-2 PROJECT PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS
9.3 APPENDIX III: SELECTED TEXT
The Port Chicago, California Ship Explosion of 17 Jule 1944
(Commander H.E. Jennings, USN 1948)
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
r
1.0 INTRODUCTION
I This document, a review and assessment of cultural resources located within the area proposed
for the Containerization Project, Naval Weapons Station, Concord (NWS Concord), Contra
Costa County, California, has been prepared to meet federal regulatory requirements for cultural
resources pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as
' . amended) (16 U.S.C., Section 470f) and its implementing regulations 36 CFR 800, the
Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-291 and P.L. 96-625) and cultural
resource requirements of the United States Navy (Department of the Navy OPNAVINST
5090.1A, Environmental and Natural Resources Program Manual, 2 October 1990, Chapters 5,
19, and 20).
The mission of NWS Concord is to receive, renovate, maintain and issue, ammunition,
explosives and technical ordnance material. The construction of the proposed Containerization
Project will assist the Station to meet its mission goals.
The proposed project area includes the former town of Port Chicago and is in the near vicinity of
the Port Chicago National Memorial, designating the facility for ". . . the critical role . . . played
in the Second World War . . . and the historic importance of the explosion which occurred at the
Port Chicago Naval Magazine on July 17, 1944.". No recorded prehistoric or historic .
archaeological sites. Native American villages or places of significance are located in or adjacent
to the Containerization Project area. No historic properties eligible for inclusion on the National
Register of Historic Places (NRHP) have been identified as part of the archival and field research
conducted for the proposed project. The former town of Port Chicago does not appear eligible
for the NRHP even though it was impacted by and suffered considerable damage from the World
' War II naval magazine explosion, the most significant event to occur in the study area to date.
The town was razed in 1969 as part of the development of a safety buffer zone.
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
NWS Concord encompasses 12,904 acres and is situated between Suisun Bay and the
northwestern portion of the City of Concord, Contra Costa County, California. The Station is the
major ammunition transshipment port on the west coast of the United States and utilizes an
ocean terminal facility to tranship materials from trucks or railcars to ships and vice versa. The
facility consists of a Tidal Area (including seven islands), an Inland Area, and a small facility in
the City of Pittsburg (Self et al. 1993:1).
The proposed Containerization Project has two major components: an upgrade of Ammunition
Pier 3 (P-319; Army PN 44171) and the construction of a Rail and Truck Explosive Holding
Yard (P-275; Army PN 44173) with eight to 12 barricaded/rail/truck container holding pads.
The project covers the approximate area encompassed by grids FF-HH/6-11 of the NWS
Concord Grid System (NAVFACENGCOMIWESTDIV n.d.) and is within Subarea 2 of the
Tidal Resource Area (Self et al. 1993:Fig. 2).
The project area includes most of the former town of Port Chicago which is located within the
Tidal Area on either side of Main Street and the Port Chicago Highway. The former town is
located approximately five miles east of Martinez in north-central Contra Costa County about
one mile south Suisun Bay and about three quarters of a mile north of Clyde. Pier 3 is located at
the top of Main Street, the north-south street which bifurcates the town, and is also situated east
of the Port Chicago National Memorial. Pier 2 is to the west and Pier 3 is to the east (T 3N, R
1W, Sections 6 and 7 and T 3N, R 2W, Sections 1 and 12, USGS Vine Hill, Calif. 1980; PRC
and William Self 1992:2; Harding Lawson Associates (HLA) 1994) [Figs. 1-3].
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
3.0 SOURCES CONSULTED
3.1 RESEARCH SOURCES
A prehistoric and historic site record and literature search was conducted by the Northwest
Information Center, Historical Resources Information System (File No. 94-362). Specialized
listings consulted for previously evaluated properties of significance, merit and/or distinction,
etc., include the National Register of Historic Places (AASLH/+ 1991; the California Office of
Historic Preservation [CAL/OHP] (1990a, 1991, 1992b, 1993a, 1994; USNPS 1994); the
California History Plan (CAL/OHP 1973a-b); the California Inventory of Historic Resources
(CAL/OHP 1976;; California Historical Landmarks (CAL/OHP 1990b) and California Points of
Historical Interest (1992a) and updates (CAL/OHP 1990a, 1991, 1992b, 1993a-c); and Five
Views:An Ethnic Sites Survey for California (CAL/OHP 1988).
In addition, Historic Civil Engineering Landmarks of San Francisco and Northern California
(American Society of Civil Engineers 1977) and a number of local inventories and lists were
also consulted (Anonymous n.d., 1989; Contra Costa County Planning Department 1976; Contra
Costa County Community Development Department 1991:9-12 to 9-18), and, the Contra Costa
County Historical Society (1994).'
Documents, primarily newspaper articles and appraisals of the non-town area, at the NWS
Concord, Port Chicago Room were also viewed. Reference material from the Bancroft Library,
University of California, Berkeley and material on file at the Western Region Office, National
Park Service (NPS), San Francisco and Basin Research Associates, San Leandro was also
consulted (see 8.0 References Cited and Consulted).
3.2 INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS
Several individuals, generally affiliated with local historical societies and planning departments,
have been consulted previously by NWS Concord in regard to cultural resources (B. Wheeler,
NWS Concord, personal communication 10/27/94). Other individuals stationed at NWS
Concord were contacted about possible appraisal information, demolition details, Afro-American
residents or residential areas within the former town of Port Chicago and businesses which may
have served Afro-American servicemen (see Appendix II:List II-1).
Native American individuals and groups were not contacted as part of this study as there are no
recorded prehistoric archaeological sites, ethnographic settlements, contemporary Native
American rancherias (or communities) or notable geographic points of interest/concern present
within the project area.
4.0 BACKGROUND
NWS Concord has been the subject of a recent cultural resources overview by Self et al. (1993).
The report, Cultural Resources Overview, Naval Weapons Station Concord, Contra Costa
COMA% California, provides: (1) a brief archaeological and historical context for the Station: (2)
an archaeological sensitivity map also showing areas of previous archaeological surveys, known
sites, and, locations where cultural resources might exist; (3) completed State of California
Historic Resources Inventory Forms for all pre-1946 structures; and, (4) a map with the locations
of buildings and structures that appear to qualify for inclusion in the NRNP. The NRHP
potential of the former town of Port Chicago, razed in 1969, is not specifically addressed in the
1. The site of Bav Point. located "on river front. Port Chicano", is one of the 195 Sites of Historical Interest
identified in Contra Costa County (Contra Costa County Historical Society 1994:#154). ,
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
3
overview. The sections below summarize and enhance information provided in the overview
with respect to the proposed project area.
4.1 NATIVE AMERICAN
4.1 A Prehistoric'-
Archaeological inventories of portions of the installation have been completed by the US Army
Corps of Engineers (1980a-b), Cartier (1985), Duff (1991), Self (1989), PRC Environmental
I Management, Inc. and William Self Associates (1992) and Self et al. (1993) . Few prehistoric
cultural resources have been recorded within the Station and no prehistoric archaeological sites
have been recorded in or adjacent to the proposed project (Self et al. 1993:Table 2 for a review
of the known cultural resources and studies within a mile of the facility; NWIC File No. 94-362).
iOne unrecorded site within the Station may be represented by the isolated find of a large
lanceolate obsidian biface recovered from a road cut adjacent to a natural spring in the Inland
Area (i.e., archaeologically sensitive areas located in Section 21) (Self et al. 1993:17 and Site
Map, Historic Resources-Inland Area). A prehistoric site, either representing an outlier of
CA-CCo-250 or a previously unknown site. was exposed during the Port Chicago Highway
Pipeline Realignment Study in early 1994. The site: located at the far southern end of the Station
may extend into the Citv of Concord's Willow Pass Community Park (Ananian 1994). No
further information is available. No other indicators of prehistoric occupation such as culturally
affected sediments (e.g., midden), ecofacts (e.g., shell, fauna) or artifacts were observed during
the inspections conducted for the 1993 overview (Self et al. 1993:17 and Site Map, Historic
Resources-Inland Area; Self, personal communication, 1994).
General overviews and perspectives on the regional prehistory are found in Moratto (1984) and
Stewart (1981, 1982) as well as iri Self et al. (1993).
4.113 Ethnographic
No Native American villages or known trails are situated within the project area. The proposed
project area is situated within the ethnographic and historic boundaries of the Native American
group known as the Bai- Miwok or Saclan which occupied the area from Walnut Creek east to
the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta.3
Each Bay Miwok tribelet occupied a specific territory with several more or less permanent
settlements and a larger number of seasonal campsites for an annual round of subsistence
activities. The Julpun tribelet located to the east in the vicinity of present-day Antioch (Levy
1978:398-399, Fig. 1), alternatively known as the Chupcan (Bennyhoff 1977:Map 2), is the
closest known ethnographic village. The Chupcan occupied the area between Port Chicago and
the mouth of Marsh Creek (e.g., Oakley area). The village of Chupan was first located by
soldiers associated with the Captain Pedro Fages and Fray Juan Crespi expedition of 1772 who
had proceeded along the south shore of Carquinez Strait and Suisun Bay (Puerto Dulce). A few
years later in early April 1776, Juan Bautista de Anza's second expedition which included Lt.
Jose Moraga and Fray Pedro Font, also commented upon this large village (Beck and Haase
1974:#17). The village appears on the 1776 Jose de Carnizares map (though incorrectly placed)
and the 1777 Font map, and Villavicencio map. In addition, Anza noted the existence of a
temporarily abandoned village at the Antioch Bridge which was. designated San Ricardo
2. The proposed project is not included on the Contra Costa County Community Development Department
archaeological sensitivity map(1991:9-15, Fig. 9-2).
3. Note: Saclan is also the name of a village south of the Pacheco Creek Drainaee.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
4
(Bennyhoff 1977:143-144 after Bolton 1930:111:144, 276; IV:383, 396; Bennyhoff 1977:160
after Harlow 1950:Map 7) and Cook 1957:Map 2). Father Fray Ramon Abella also passed
through the Chupunes area on his way into the delta in 1811 (Bennyhoff 1977:140 after Cook
1957:145-146).
Baptismal data and observations by early visitors Viader and Kotzebue (and by inference Abella,
Duran and Arguello) as well as a 1824 Map (Anonymous 1824) indicate that the south shore of
Carquinez Strait and Suisun Bay was depopulated after 1810 and a significant population loss
occurred after 1812 (Bennyhoff 1977:139; see Section 43A Hispanic Period below for early
Spanish encounters with Native American groups in the study area). The depopulation was
probably due to the introduction of diseases and removal to the missions for conversion and
labor.
Additional information on the Native Americans in the study area is included in Kroeber (1925,
1932), Bennyhoff(1977) and Levy (1978).
4.2 HISTORIC PERIOD
4.2A Hispanic Period
After an initial period of exploration. the Spanish concentrated on the founding of presidios,
missions, and secular towns with the land held by the Crown (1769-1821). In contrast, the later
Mexican policy stressed individual ownership of the land (Kyle 1990:463). The proposed
project area is situated within an ungranted area west of Rancho Monte Diablo and east of
Rancho Los Medanos (Hendry and Bowman 1940:map; Beck and Haase 1974:#30).
During the Hispanic Period, Native Americans worked with former neighboring groups at the
Missions. Later, with the secularization of the missions by Mexico in 1834, the majority of the
aboriginal population gradually moved from the missions to ranchos to work as agriculturalists
and manual laborers.
4.2B American Period
Contra Costa County is among the 27 initial California counties (Coy 1973:142, 259). Growth
in the general study area has been linked with agriculture, a coal mining boom from the 1850s-
1880s, and the development of transportation networks to service both industry and agriculture
with market links. The Contra Costa County towns of Port Costa, Crockett, Vallejo Junction.
Martinez, Bay Point. Pittsburg and Antioch among others, were important focal points for
services and the transport of coal, fish, lumber, and wheat to San Francisco and Sacramento and
beyond by water and, later, by rail (Goddard 1857; Gudde 1974; Emanuels 1986).
SEAL BLUFF LANDING, BA YPOINT AND PORT CHICAGO
Seal Bluff Landing, located opposite Seal Island on Suisun Bay, was the first suitable location
east of Martinez with sufficient depth for the passage and docking of steam powered ships even
at low tide. The landing, comprising several wharves and warehouses, was an important grain
transhipment point for wheat from the "New York of the Pacific" (present-day Pittsburg), and
from the interior valleys near Mount Diablo, Clayton and Ygnacio Valley. Even though initial
settlement dates to the early 1850s, the first known warehouse (50 x 100 feet) at Seal Bluff
Landing was not built until 1868 (Emmanuels 1986:15; McLeod 1994).
Luther F. Mallory received title to 166 acres and Putnam Hayes title to 160 acres in the vicinity
of Seal Bluff via letters of Patent dated February 1872 (Collier 1983). Four years later, Calesta
Sayles received title to 113.26 acres. In turn. Daniel Cunningham and E.A. Neely acquired their
acreage (Historic Record Company 1926:159: Collier 1983:141-142; McLeod 1994).
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
1 5
1
The Seal Bluff Warehouse Company was incorporated in July 1878. A wharf and the Seal Bluff
Warehouse were built after Charles S. Lhose received his patent in February 1880 for a tract
known as Seal Bluff (Lot 1 of Township 2 North, Range 2 West, Section 1) (Collier 1983:141).
In 1886, as a consequence of a wheat boom, the S. Blum's Bay Point Grain Warehouse, located
50 feet north of the main track of the Southern Pacific Railroad, was rebuilt (Dakin 1886; Sloan
& Robson 1918; Collier 1983:141 as 1897).
Bay Point Station was established in 1878 by the Central Pacific Railroad (later the San Pablo
' and Tulare Railroad; McLeod 1994). Nonetheless, Bay Point, located to the east of Seal Bluff
[Fig. 3], was of insufficient size in 1882 to warrant inclusion in the Histon, of Contra Costa
County, California (Solcum 1882). By May 1901, Bay Point warranted a post office (Frickstad
1955:20. 23). At this time, Bay Point was located at the junction of a north-south road (linking
Seal Bluff Landing with Willow Pass north of Concord) and the Southern Pacific as well as the
San Francisco and San Joaquin Railroad tracks (USGS 1901).
Bay Point was well served by a deep water anchorage and freight and passenger steamers to
Stockton. Sacramento and San Francisco. This was followed later by the construction of a
number of railroads to Pittsburg and Martinez as well as Oakland. By 1878, the San Pablo and
Tulare Railroad was complete and ran from Tracy through Byron, Brentwood. Antioch,
Pittsburg/Cornwall (bypassing Seal Bluff), and Bay Point and on to Martinez to connect with the
Central Pacific Railroad. In 1899, a parallel line was constructed between Seal Bluff and
Antioch by the San Francisco and San Joaquin Railroad Company. This line was later purchased
by the Santa Fe Railroad Company (Smith and Elliot 1879:map; Spect & Shideler 1908?;
Historic Record Company 1926:159; Fickewirth 1992:133; Collier 1983:142). In the late 1870s
and early 1880s, Bay Point appears to have functioned as a rail stop for nearby Seal Bluff
Landing.
Another railroad in the study area, the Bay Point and Clayton Railroad, was incorporated August
5, 1906 by the Cowell Portland Cement Company (Collier v.d.; 1983:145; Western Railroad
1968; Self et al. 1993). This nine mile line between Bay Point and Cowell, situated below
Concord (at the present-day "the Crossings" at Bailey Road in Concord). was operational on
April 9, 1909 (see Weber ca. 1914 for location). Reportedly, a wharf was built at the site of the
original NWS Concord Pier 1 to service the rail line. Eight miles of this shortline were sold to
the US Navy in 1941 and the remaining 2.25 miles abandoned in 1953 (Fickewirth 1992:16; see
Self et al. 1993:7, 272-276 DPR Form 523).
The Oakland & Antioch Railway Company interurban passenger service to Bay Point to Walnut
Creek via Concord arrived in May 1911. This line was transferred to the Oakland, Antioch &
Eastern Railway and extended between Oakland and Bay Point by April 1913. This interurban
railway line was sold in January 1920 to the San Francisco-Sacramento Railroad Company, and
in turn, was purchased by the Sacramento Northern Railroad in January 1929; rail service ceased
by 1941 (Fickewirth 1992:93; Self et al. 1993:9).
The London-based Copper King Smelting Company, incorporated in June 1901, was operating
the Bay Point Smelter, a 1.3 million dollar smelter at Seal Bluff Landing, in April 1901. This
facility relied on ore from a mine 28 miles east of Fresno whose assay proved poor. The smelter
closed in December 1902 and bankruptcy filed in June 1903 (Metcalfe 1902; McMahon 1908
[location]; Collier v.d.; 1983:141; Emanuels ' 1986:15; Self et al. 1993:8 after Hulaniski
1917:391; McLeod 1994).
By 1907 the coal mines of Mount Diablo were closed andrain shipping at Port Costa to the
west (active since 1878) was minimal. In November 1907, C.A. Smith of the C.A. Smith
Lumber Company purchased 1.500 acres in and around Seal Bluff from the heirs of Daniel
Cunningham and E.A. Neely (the Cunningham. Neeley and Ambrose Ranches). At this time.
,� BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
6
there was a post office, a grain warehouse, a ranch house, a saloon and general store (Collier
1983:142; McLeod 1994). The Smith Lumber Co. owned the area between the north-south Bay
Point and Clayton Railroad on the west side of NWS Concord and all of Section 6 and the upper
half of Section 7 of T 3N R IW (McMahon 1908). By January 1908, the C.A. Smith Lumber
Company at Bay Point was the largest woodworking operation in the United States. ,Reportedly
the rapid growth of the mill relied on mainly Swedish and Norwegian settlers from lumber areas
in Minnesota and Oregon (McLeod 1994:after Fahy n.d. and Contra Costa Times 11/16/86).
About 2,000 employees .were required for the operation of the various lumber yards, planing
mills, re-sawing mills, a sash and door mill, a box factory, a hardwood veneer factory, an electric
light plant, and water works. The company rebuilt in 1915 after a 1913 fire and in 1917, the
company reorganized as the "Coos Bay Lumber Company". It suffered another fire and moved
to Oakland in 1932 (Collier 1983:143; Emmanuels 1986:15; Self et a]. 1993:Table 1; McLeod
1994). The Coos Bay Lumber Company Warehouse, constructed in 1916, is still extant within
NWS Concord (Self et al. 1993:194, Building A3).
In August 1908, Smith filed a township map for "The City of Bay Point" of what was to become
Port Chicago with the County Recorder (Miller ca. 1908-1909; Dunkel 1910). The industrial
area of the.. town was situated between the waterfront and railroad, while the remainder was for
commercial and residential uses. Many of the businesses were located at the northern end of the
town in the vicinity of Main and Messenger Streets while the school and churches were located
in the southern part of the town below Fleet Street (Historic Record Company 1926:159,
Sanborn 1912, 1919, 1925).
Though the original covenants provided for a dry town, a municipal saloon was established in
.May 1916 at the northeast comer of Messenger and Main Streets and later moved across the
street, and again further south along Main to Lind Street (Collier n.d.:13). By 1917, Bay Point
had 1000 residents, an elementary school (with six teachers), several excellent stores, an Odd
Fellows Hall (19 11), moving picture theater,.two churches (Saint Francis Catholic Church and
the Community Congregational Church with a third, a Swedish Lutheran Church in
construction), a two story hotel (The California Hotel built in 1916 by the Heinz Brothers), and a
recreation hall (Biel Hall) (Gudde 1974:254; Collier 1983:142; Emanuels 1986:15-16; Self et al.
1993:9 after Bohakei 1983:5 and Emanuels 1986:18; McLeod 1994). In addition, to streets,
curbs, sidewalks and a sewer system, water was pumped from four wells in the foothills one-and-
a-half miles away and stored in two large tanks on hill above the town (Hulaniski 1917:390-
. 392).
In 1918, as a result of World War 1, Bay Point industry included the Electric Metals Company
(with immense copper smelters) and the Pacific Shipbuilding Company at Seal Bluff Landing. ' I
In addition, the approximately 4,000 workers were housed at both Bay Point and the town of
Clyde, located approximately two miles to the southwest (Sloan & Robson 1918: CAL/OHP
1976:70; Collier 1983:142; Kyle 1990:64; Self et al. 1993:9). According to one researcher, the
Pacific Shipbuilding Company built all ten ships ordered by the United States War Department'
completing the last in 1923 (McLeod 1994: after Fahy n.d. and Emanuels 1986:15-19). In
contrast, Emanuels states that only one of the ten proposed 10,000 ton freighters was launched
(on November 30, 1918, ten days after the end of World War 1) and that the Pacific Coast
Shipbuilding Company left town when the war ended (Emanuels 1986:16-18). Between 1918
and January 1953, a branch rail line of the Southern Pacific Company rail linked the
shipyard/Seal Bluff Landing area with Clyde (Collier 1983:145; Emanuels 1986:15).
Bay Point, in spite of the "boom and bust" cycles retained a population of about 1,000 between
11968-1930 and was renamed Port Chicago on October 31, 1931. The Bay Point post office was
officially transferred to Port Chicago on November 1, 1931 (Frickstad 1955:20; Collier
1983:144).
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
i 7
' A review of historic maps provides a visual record of the study area. In 1898, Seal Bluff
Landing had at least four buildings and a road linking it to the South Pacific Railroad tracks. At
this time, the area north of the tracks was marshy and Bay Point was a rail station (USGS 1898).
The City of Bay Point was plated in 1908 (Miller 1908; see also Miller ca. 1908-1909). By
1912, the Sanborn fire insurance maps south of the rail road tracks included most of the four
block long area along Bay View bounded by Kinzie Street to Division Street and between
Messenger (the northernmost east-west street) in the vicinity of Main Street two blocks south to
Lind Street and west to Kinzie. A lunette block between Burgess and Lind Streets and the
' accompanying blocks to the north, south, and east along California and Park Avenues is the only
violation of the original geometric plat of Bay Point (compare Miller ca. 1908-1909 with
Sanborn 1925) [see also Figs. 4a-b].
WORLD WAR II TO THE PRESENT
By 1940, the area to the west between the shore and railroad tracks had been mostly filled and
I occupied by rail road sidings with the Bay Point Yacht Harbor nearby at the foot of Main Street
in the vicinity of present-day Pier 3. The Yacht harbor, established in 1932, had berths for 40
boats until it was purchased by the Navy in 1942 (Collier n.d.:9).
Few additional buildings were built between 1925 and 1940. In 1940, the densest concentration
of buildings was located along the east side of Bay View Avenue, the furthermost original street
on the west side of Port Chicago (Sanborn 1925; US War Dept 1940). Between 1940 and 1951,
the area west of Bav View Avenue: was developed. Unfortunately, the buildings illustrated on
the 1951 USGS are schematic and do not conform to the 1908-1909 or Sanborn parcel
configurations (Miller ca. 1908-1909; USGS 1951; Sanborn 1912, 1919, 1925, 1945).
Nonetheless the 1951 USGS provides sufficient information to indicate that Port Chicago had a
number of unoccupied blocks [Figs. 4a-b].
The United States Naval Magazine at Port Chicago was established on January 27, 1942 on 630
acres, subordinate to the naval ammunition depot at Mare Island. Mare Island had reached
capacity for munitions handling and the nearby town of Vallejo had expanded considerably,
impeding further growth and raising safety issues. The Navy purchased acreage formerly
' occupied by the Coos Bay Lumber Company and Cooper King Smelter Company and used fill
from the hills south of Port Chicago to infill the area west of Main Street between the bayshore
and railroad tracks. The facilities were operable by December 1942 although construction
continued through 1944. In contrast to the less than 1,000 residents of Port Chicago, NWS
Concord had a personnel complement of approximately 4,000 of which 2,500 were
AfroAmerican. By 1944, the facility included nearly 7,000 acres and was the principal Pacific
coast loading and storage point for ammunition (Pearson 1964:85; Collier n.d.:9; 1983:144-145;
' Self et al. 1993:10-12 after U.S. Bureau of Ordnance 1945:7 and U.S. Bureau of Yards and
Docks 1947:45, 331).
' A series of explosions on the ammunition loading dock on July 17, 1944 at Pier 1 destroyed two
ships, the S.S. Quinolt Victory and S.S. E.A. Bryan, and killed 322 men and injured 390
[alternatively, there were 320 or 325 dead of which 202 were black enlisted men (Jennings 1948;
Allen 1989)].4 Much of the tidal area and all of the piers were destroyed, a diesel locomotive, all
cars on the pier and practically every building and structure on the Station suffered some damage
(NAVFACENGCOM 1967:D2).
Munitions were loaded exclusively by "colored enlisted personnel" due the racial segregation
practiced by the military. None of the personnel were trained to handle munitions in contrast to
the union, and more expensive, civilian stevedores. Three weeks after the explosion and its
4. Only 81 bodies were recovered of which 30 were identifiable.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
8
aftermath, 258 of the surviving military loaders refused to load any more munitions. A number
of factors have been cited for their refusal including physically demanding work for poor pay,
discriminatory work practices and, after the explosion, fear for their safety.5
The explosion established that handling and loading munitions, which had been perceived as
dangerous by the black seamen (and the source of continuous complaints), was very dangerous
and that safety concerns were still subordinate to loading schedules. After the cleanup, the black
enlisted men were denied the 30 day leave granted to white personnel. Further, black enlisted
personnel excused previously for cause were reassigned to load munitions. The ensuing events,
known as the "Port Chicago Mutiny" resulted in courts martial of 50 black enlisted personnel
with prison terms varying from 8 to 15 years. Forty-seven of the 50 were released in January
1946; two were hospitalized and bad conduct prevented the release of the third. By 1945, the
policy of segregated "colored enlisted personnel" was abandoned by the Navy, and later for the
entire military in 1948 (Pearson 1964:84; Terkel 1984:393-394; Allen 1989:xiv, 43-48, 135, 145
[as 258 individuals refused]; Self et al 1993:13 [as 328 refused after U.S. Bureau of Ordnance
1945:12]; NAVFACENGCOM 1967:4; Allen 1989:xiv, 43-48, 135).
Although this explosion caused no deaths in Port Chicago, 109 residents were injured and the
majority of the 660 homes and all of the 27 storesibusinesses were damaged. The latter included
three hotels, a movie house, and buildings in the shopping district of Port Chicago. The
explosion was felt throughout the area and heard as far away as San Francisco and Sacramento.
Windows were blown out in downtown Concord, six miles away, and debris such as steel plates
weighing as much as 15 tons were found three miles away. The town of Port Chicago never
recovered fully from the disaster (Pearson 1964:155; Collier 1983:1145-147; Allen 1989:65-67;
Self et al. 1993:12-14).6
As a result of this great disaster, a two-mile safety zone around the piers was proposed and '
debated bitterly for decades (e.g.. Anonymous 1.956; Smitten 1955, 1958, McLeod 1994). By
1958, Port Chicago's population had shrunk to 2,650, property values by 15-20%, and retail
business by 30% (McLeod 1994: after Oakland Tribune 1/2/58). In October 1967, Congress
passed Public law 90-110 authorizing the purchase of land to provide an explosive safety zone
(HGHB 1989:3-2). At this time, the town of Port Chicago was occupied by a number of retired
individuals, and lower income employees from the nearby steel, oil, chemical, and paper plants
(with an unemployment of less than 1%). Nonetheless, most of households reportedly had at
least one family member who had attended college. There were five clubs including the Lions,
American Legion (whose building was used as town hall and theatre), Young Ladies Institute,
the Parent Teachers Association, and an Improvement Association. The 700 modest homes ,
appear to have been mostly of indeterminate style (as suggested by newspaper photographs). In
addition, there were five/six Churches; a $250,000 milling plant; three small factories; a
warehouse complex; several gas stations, two grocery stores; two barbershops; a small hotel [the
Lora Hotel with an insurance office]; three/four fine bars/taverns; various independent stores; a
5. For example, there was no potential advancement beyond the rank of Petty Officer. Further, the division
officers had previously approached loading "competitively", pitting work groups against one another. In
addition, there were.limited recreational facilities on the.base. Moreover, the town of Port Chicago was
segregated and hostile to black service personnel. although the nine taverns did serve them. More hospitable
towns such as Pittsburg,Richmond,Oakland. and San Francisco required commercial transportation.
6. See the Unclassified Technical Paper, The Port Chicago, California Ship Explosion of 17 July 1944 by
Jennings (1948: selected text in Appendix II1). the NWS Concord Master Plan (HGHB 1989:3-1 to 3-3)and
Self et al. (1993:10-14) Section 3.3 Development of U.S. Naval Magazine.Port Chicago for a more extensive '
review of the cause and aftermath of the explosions. In addition. Self et al. (1993:Table 1) provides a
summary table of the.Chronological Development of NWS Concord and Vicinity [Note: there are some
differences between this table and some sources (e.g,.,Historic Record Company 1926:Collier n.d.. 1983)].
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
9
Post Office-, a fire station; a recently'upgraded sewer system; and, a 650 pupil elementary school
rebuilt to meet earthquake standards (Los Angeles Herald Examiner 1967 4/30/67; Contra Costa
Times 5/14/67; Concord Transcript 3/13/68).
By January 1969, the purchase of 550 of the 775 parcels had been negotiated. Although the
town was not relocated, some houses were moved to nearby Clyde, Nichols, and Shore Acres
(east of Nichols). In addition, 60 mature sycamore trees which had been planted in 1944 along
Mereen Avenue were moved to various regional parks in the vicinity. The protracted closure led
to opportunistic dumping in the town by other Contra Costa residents resulting in a rat problem.
This material was not cleared immediately for the Navy had "promised salvage rights" to the
residents and the over 350 homes not moved were to be left intact until litigation on the final
property settlement was completed. The bulldozer razing of the town required two to three
months and did not result in the removal of all streets, sidewalks, and utilities to buildings. The
Bay Point Elementary School, Veterans Hall (library and City Hall), firehouse, St. Frances of
Rome Catholic Church and Open Bible Church were not demolished and the latter was moved in
February 1970. The last resident left by December 20, 1969. Reportedly $19.8 million was
shared by the 650 industrial, commercial and residential property owners (NAVFACENGCOM
1967: Contra Costa Times 1/6/69, 3/13/69; [Contra Costa?] Morning News Gazette 2/17/69;
Concord Transcript 1/7/69, 8/13/69; [Oakland] Tribune 6/22/71; Pittsburg Post Dispatch
2/21/69, Collier 1983:146-148; Emmanuels 1986:19, HGHB 1989:3-2).
NWS Concord has continued its mission to receive, renovate, maintain and issue, ammunition.
explosives and technical ordnance material. Renovation of older structures and the construction
of new buildings and facilities in support of its mission have occurred from 1946 to the present.
5.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD REVIEW
5.1 PREVIOUS RESEARCH AND CULTURAL SENSITIVITY
1 Prior inventories by Self et al. (1993:17) and the US.Army Corps of Engineers (1980b) include
the project area. Archaeological sensitivity zones were developed for NWS Concord as a result
of the reseal conducted for the 1993 overview (Self et al. 1993, Historic Resources Site Map).
The former town of Port Chicago and its periphery are located within an archaeologically
sensitive area while Pier 3 is within a low sensitivity area. An area of historic interest, based on
a review of early maps, is present in the vicinity of Main Street and the railroad tracks. This
location appears to conform to the original focus of Bay Point (see Self et al. 1993, Historic
' Resources Site Map).
A cursory surface survey of the original neighborhoods of Port Chicago was undertaken by Self
et al. (1993:17) who noted the presence of household and other objects on the surface. Two
' buildings/complexes, survivors of the razing of the Port Chicago in 1969, are also present within
the project area along Fleet Street east of Main Street. These consist of the Port Chicago School
building, built in 1938; and, the Firehouse, constructed in 1945.
The school complex, located on Block 38 and formerly bounded by Central, Hayden, Humboldt
and Fleet Streets, consists of three buildings. These include the main school building (Building
181) and two others (Buildings 182 and 183) which are early 1950s additions (Anonymous
3/14/56; new gym and three class rooms). The former school was originally the location of the
Tidal Area Administration complex and is now used for port operations, administration, office,
ordnance operations, etc.
The Firehouse (Building 188), located on Block 28 on Main Street, was formerly bounded by
Fleet. Lind and Central Streets. The building is now occupied by the U.S. Coast Guard Port
ISafety detachment (Self et al. 1993:18, 152-155. 164-67).
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
10
A number of former PortChicago buildings were relocated to Clyde, Nichols and Shore Acres.
In addition, four former Port Chicago structures have been identified as present within NWS
Concord (at 200 A Street built 1910;247 A Street built 1915; 248 A Street built 1915; and, 250
A Street built 1935). �.
NWS Concord is also the location of the Port Chicago National Memorial, designating the
facility for ". . . the critical role . . . played in the Second World War . . . and the historic
importance of the explosion which occurred at the Port Chicago Naval Magazine on July 17,
1944." The monument, located opposite the former Pier 1, lists the names of those who died at
the site of the explosion.and is open to the public one day of the year.? This memorial has not
been listed on the NRHP (R. Kelly, NPS, Western Region, San Francisco, personal
communication).8
The 1993 overview identified no sites and/or structures, either individually or as part of a
district, as eligible for inclusion in the NRHP (Self et al. 1993:19-20). None of the architectural
resources located within or formerly within the town of Port Chicago have been identified as
eligible (Kyle 1990:65; Self et al. 1993:20, 66-85, 152-155, 164-167) and the NRHP evaluation
of the former town is not addressed in Self et al. (1993).
5.2 CURRENT PROJECT INVENTORY AND OBSERVATIONS
An archaeological field review/inventory of the proposed project area was conducted November
29, 1994 by-Dr. Donna M. Garaventa and Mr. Stuart A. Guedon. The review and pedestrian
inventory consisted of a visual inspection geared to archaeological materials in reference to
structures located on the former blocks of the town of Port Chicago. The team initially viewed
the former school complex (Buildings 181-183) and Firehouse (Building 188) and then surveyed
the project area north of the Port Chicago Highway and east of Main Street, followed by the area
west of Main Street, and then the area south of the Port Chicago Highway [Figs. 2, 4a-b]. Mr.
Guedon viewed the Pier 3 area accompanied by Mr. Sam Evans NWS Concord and completed
the south area survey on December 8, 1994. Dr. Colin I. Busby completed a familiarization
review of the area on February 8, 1995.
Maps utilized during the field review included the Containerization Project map
(NAVFACENGCOM/WESTDIV 1994), an enlarged detail of the USGS Vine Hill (195 1) for the
schematic location of buildings extant in 1951 and, an annotated copy of the Official Map of the
Cite of Bail Point(Miller ca. 1908-1909 with Sanborn 1912, 1919, 1925, 1945) [Figs. 4a-b].
The project area was surveyed using random transects varying from 10-30 meters apart. ,
Visibility was limited to approximately 4-5% due to vegetation and the presence of former
streets and sidewalks associated with Port Chicago. The vegetation consists of generally low
grasses with some high fennel plants interspersed with the remnants of residential and street
7. The Station is also noteworthy for the 1945 shipment of the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and
Nagasaki (Collier n.d.:10). In fact, one author has charged that the 1944 explosion was a nuclear device
deliberately detonated (Vogel 1982). In addition, N7WS Concord has been accused of handling, storing and
shipping nuclear weapons and has been newsworthy for Vietnam War protests (Allen 1989:147-149).
8. This information is contrary to the assertion by Self et al. (1993) in the overview (C. Howse, Office of
Historic Preservation, Sacramento and G. Chappell. National Park Service, Western Region, San Francisco,
personal communications). However. the National Register staff is researching to determine if the memorial
was added to or will be included on the NRHP. A commemorative memorial designated by Congress should
automatically be listed and the Navy considers the site of the Memorial to be a National Register property(L.
Wall. Environmental Planning Branch, U.S. Navy, WESTDIV). The overview did not evaluate the town of
Port Chicago for NRHP status.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
11
landscaping (e.g., trees, shrubs and plants). The number and diversity of tree species is
noticeably higher on the east side of Main Street.
5.2A Current Setting
Current uses include utilization of three former buildings/complexes (school, firehouse, pump
house) and associated street access and parking areas, as well as fencing, a relay tower, modern
ETS access ports and minor impacts from grazing. The Pump House (Building 506), consisting
of two buildings on Block 72 in the area south of the Port Chicago Highway, was noted during
the inventory although previous archival research had not indicated its presence. Contemporary
trash and debris are generally confined to the periphery of the area east of Main Street.
Materials associated with the former buildings are limited and include perimeter borders
(concrete and dry laid concrete fragments); random lengths of milled lumber and wood panels
(some painted); pieces of concrete from house perimeter foundations; and, fragments of concrete
aggregate, red brick, and painted concrete. The remains of front walkways are generally not
present.9
A number of paved streets and some relatively minor sidewalk segments are also present. Other
remnants of the former Port Chicago infrastructure include several standing telephone poles,
probable telephone pole bases, metal and wooden fence posts, stop signs/posts, a number of in-
place but inoperative fire hydrants. water service concrete segments (California Water Service),
an occasional electrical hook up and isolated metal conduit, electrical cable conduits with multi-
wire telephone cable present, concrete sewer connections and metal collar rings, manhole covers,
corrugated pipe culverts, and even a few concrete pipe sewer segments and ceramic sewer
' pipes.10 Part of a eucalyptus grove which thins eastward to a double row of trees at the far
northeast corner of the proposed project appears to be associated with the former town park (e.g.,
Spect & Shideler 1908?).
A field review of the available Sanborn Fire Insurance maps (1912, 1919, 1925, 1945) indicates
some minor lack of correspondence between former buildings, perimetc- features, and
landscaping. For example, there is a depression flanked by three trees and a concrete perimeter
boundary (ca. 10-12" high x 8" wide) located at Central Avenue and Lind Street which is
probably the location a former house, but does not appear to be illustrated on the Sanborn maps.
In another case, metal posts from a probable wire mesh fence are present at the northeast corner
lot of Lind and Humboldt Street (Block 22), yet only a single building mid-block along Lind was
present in 1945.
9. See south side of Lind Street on Block 32. bounded by Bay View Avenue. Kinzie, and Fleet Streets.
Staircase about Chestnut Avenue in Block 73 bounded by Humboldt Street, Champion and Harris Avenues
(south of Port Chicago Highway).
10. A manhole cover from the PHOENIX IRON WORKS CO. OAKLAND, CAL and one from the
STOCKTON IRON WORKS STOCKTON CAL. is present on Park Avenue between Burgess and Lind
Streets. A fire hydrant and stop sign pole are present on California Avenue at Burgess Street and Humboldt
at Minnesota Street. A fire hydrant produced by UNITED IRONWORKS and a pole can be found at
California Avenue and Lind Street. Fire hydrants produced by H. GREENBERG'S S.F. SONS are present at
Kinzie and Lind Streets as well as Kinzie and Hayden Streets and a hydrant at Bay View Avenue and Fleet
Street was made by the RESSELAER VALUE CO.TROY, N.Y. 1943 (model or type L-COA,5/F-G2S).
' BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
12
5.2B Surface Observations
The majority of the former town north of the Port Chicago Highway is on level or nearly so
ground sloping gently to the bay with some slightly mounded areas.l i The soil is noticeably
more compacted in the project area west of Bay View Avenue and sediments in the area west of
Main Street differ from the area to the east of Main Street and south of the Port Chicago
Highway (former Division Street). In this area, soils appear to have been spread on most of the
existing streets. The recent rains have highlighted the variation in vegetation resulting from
differential drainage due•to presence of buried paved streets. In a few cases, slumped areas were
observed suggesting the presence of a filled area. The ground observations offer support for the
disposal of some of the demolition debris which was apparently buried on site (see Appendix II,
List II-1, Tikalsy observation).12
5.2C Artifacts r
Only a few household associated artifact fragments were observed during the field inventory.
These included diffuse fragments from glass jars and bottles and metal lids. Their presence was
limited to an exposed area around two animal burrows. No other indicators of prehistoric or
significant subsurface historic archaeological materials were noted observed during the survey.
6.0 FINDINGS i
The proposed project will impact most of the former town of Port Chicago and Pier 3. The town. '
from its inception as the City of Bay Point at the beginning of the century, went through a
number of generally short-lived boom and bust cycles focused on lumber, smelting, and
shipbuilding until World War II. In 1942, the United States Naval Magazine was established at
Port Chicago and became the principal Pacific coast loading and storage point for munitions.
The July 17, 1944 Naval Magazine explosion and the later mutiny at Mare Island by many of the
surviving military munitions loaders are the most important events associated with NWS
Concord and the town of Port Chicago.13 The damage to the surrounding area by the explosion
demonstrated the need for a safety buffer zone and funds were sought to establish a two mile
safety zone around the piers. Funding was finally authorized in 1967 by Congress leading to the
purchase of additional land for the Station and the razing of the town of Port Chicago in 1969. A
congressionally designated memorial, the Port Chicago National Memorial, commemorating the
victims of the explosion is located opposite former Pier 1 and is open for public visitation one
day a year.
6.1 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES '
Town of Port Chicago
The former town of Port Chicago includes some streets which are still in use but not marked
(Main Street and Fleet Street), remnant arboriculturaUlandscape resources, and three
buildings/building complexes and associated parking areas. These consist of the School ,
11. These represent the remains of buried demolition debris.
12. For example, in Block 33, bounded by Bay View Avenue, Hayden. Kinzie and Fleet Streets. A depression
with an in situ and scattered concrete foundation (?) segments was noted in Block 17, Parcel 10 or 11,
bounded by Minnesota and Carroll Avenues and Kinzie Street.
13. The surviving loaders were transferred to the Mare Island Ammunition Depot to continue loading munitions
ships until the facilities at Port Chicago could be rebuilt.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
13
'1 in 1 w' attendant Buildings 182-183 and school bus shelter the Firehouse Building
(But d g 18 with a nda g ),
188) and the Pump House (Building 506).
Pier 3
Pier 3, constructed in 1944, was significantly modified and altered in 1968 as part of a facilities
improvement program (S. Evans, NWS Concord, personal communication).
6.2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Town of Port Chicago
The former town of Port Chicago was plated as the City of Bay Point in 1908, renamed Port
Chicago in 1931, and razed in 1969 as part of the US Navy program to establish a two mile
safety zone around the piers used for munitions loading. Properties formerly extant within the
' town included residential, commercial, and community buildings. The structures not moved to
nearby towns or salvaged were demolished and some of the debris buried on site (J. D. Tikalsy,
former NWS Concord Public Affairs Officer, personal communication).
Features still extant within the town and observed during the surface inventory include some
isolated landscape features (trees and shrubs), streets (generally covered with fill but still
apparent in the area west of Main Street), some sidewalk fragments and infrastructure elements
(e.g.. manholes, fire hydrants, stop signs/posts), a few building/structure footprints and perimeter
walls, minor fencing, and very minor artifactual remains.14
No prehistoric or historic archaeological materials eligible for inclusion on the NRHP were
observed during the inventory.
Pier 3
1 The potential for submerged cW-ural resources was raised by the NPS, Western Region as part of
the research. design and construction of the Port Chicago National Memorial' (USNPS/DPGEQ 1992, 1993a). In addition, the NPS also noted ". . . whether the immediate offshore vicinity is
"hallowed ground" containing the remains of many killed in the 1944 explosion."
The submerged areas adjacent to Piers 2-4 have been subjected to maintenance dredging
approximately every seven to eight years to maintain adequate depth for shipping operations
(NWS Concord 1987). The discovery of significant submerged cultural resources is not
expected as a result of previous dredging operations alongside Pier 3.
6.3 OTHER CULTURAL RESOURCES
No Native American, AfroAmerican, sociodemographic or socioeconomic districts or other
features of significance have been identified in or adjacent to the proposed Containerization
Project.
The Port Chicago National Memorial, designated by Congress in 1992 (PL 102-562) and
dedicated to the victims of the July 17, 1944 explosions, is located opposite former Pier 1. Four
for the various parcels in former town of Port Chicago have not been located
1�3. Individual appraisal records o p _ e
even though appraisals done in the 1950s for the surrounding area are available at the Port Chicago Room,
NWS Concord(e.(,.. Smitten 1955. 1958). These records were not reviewed for this report.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
14
metal fragments recovered from the Naval Magazine explosion are on display at the Port
Chicago Room, NWS Concord.
7.0 SLTMMARY AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
No historic properties eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)15
have been identified as part of the archival research and the field inventory conducted for the
proposed Containerization Project. The Port Chicago Naval Magazine explosion of July 17,
1944 is the most significant event to occur in the study area and has warranted a congressionally
designated National Memorial near the location of the former Pier 1. The former town of Port
Chicago does not appear eligible for the NRHP even though it was impacted by and suffered
considerable damage from the naval magazine explosion. The town was razed in 1969 as part of
the development of a safety buffer zone for NWS Concord.
None of the surviving architectural resources located within or formerly within the former town
of Bay Point/Port Chicago16 have been identified as eligible for the NRHP (see Self et•al. 1993).
A few isolated indicators of the former town's presence are present, but lack integrity and
significance. Integrity has been violated as a result of trash and refuse dumping by residents of
Contra Costa County prior to the town's razing in 1969, the assignment of salvage rights and the
subsequent removal of various materials by former Port Chicago residents, and the intermixing
of materials from various households and areas during demolition, debris removal and/or burial.
y
The results of both the archival research and the systematic archaeological inventory indicate
that an archaeological testing program does not appear warranted. Current construction
excavation plans indicate a cut and fill program with a maximum depth of four to five feet. Soils
testing will be implemented in areas where the excavation will exceed 12 inches below the
present ground surface. It is recommended that archaeological monitoring by a professional
archaeologist be initiated during soils testing to enhance or modify the research•findings. It is
further recommended that NWS Concord develop an Unexpected Discovery Plan if the soil
monitoring results suggest cultural resources potentially eligible for the NRHP could be exposed
during construction (36 CFR 800.11).
15. Eligibility criteria for National Register of Historic Places evaluation include: (1) is at least 50 years; (2)
retains integrity of location, design. setting, materials. workmanship, feeling, and association: and, (3) has
one or all of the following characteristics: (a) . . . with events that have made a significant contribution to
the broad patterns of our history"; (b) ". . . with the lives of persons significant in our past (c) ". . . that
embody the distinctive characteristics of a type.period. or method of construction,or that represent the work
of a master, or that possess high artistic values. or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity
whose components may lack individual distinction": or. (d) ". . . have yielded, or may be likely to yield,
information important in prehistory or history." (36 CFR 60.4).
16. West Pittsburg was renamed Bay Point in August 1993 (McLeod 1994).
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
15
REFERENCES CITED AND CONSULTED
Agricultural Adjustment Administration
1939 Vertical Aerial Photograph of Bay Point Vicinity, Scale Unknown. On file.
Contra Costa History Center, Pleasant Hill (as cited in PRC Environmental
Management, Inc. and William Self Associates, 1992).
Alexander, Wallace Bruce,Jr.
1968 The Historical Development of the Mt. Diablo Unified School District.
Masters Thesis, Department of School Administration, California State
University, Hayward.
Allen. Robert L.
1989 The Port Chicago Mutiny. Warner Books, New York.
Altrocchi. Julia Cooley
1946" Black Boat. n.p.. n.p., California.
American Association for State and Local History, National Park Service and National
Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (AASLH/NPS/NCSHPO)
1991 National Register of Historic Places 1966-1991: Cumulative List Through June
30, 1991. American Association for State and Local History, Nashville.
Tennessee.
American Society of Civil Engineers, San Francisco (ASCE)
1977 Historic Civil Engineering Landmarks of San Francisco and Northern
California. The History and Heritage Committee, San Francisco Section,
American Society of Civil Engineers. Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San
Francisco.
Anonymous/Author?
n.d. Concordance in Progress: Preliminary Historic Resources Inventory Contra
Costa County, California 1976 to USGS base maps. Copied 1/9/84, California
Archaeological Site Inventory, Rohnert Park.
v.d. Documents relating to Port Chicago mutiny trial, 1942-1944. Trial transcript:
2 boxes (1821 1.). War diary: I microfilm reel: positive & negative. Bancroft
Library, University of California, Berkeley.
1824 Plano de la Mision de San Jose, 1824. Map on file. Bancroft Library,
University of California, Berkeley (illustrated in Bennyhoff 1977:Map 4a and
4b),
1956 [Typescript 2 1/4 pages in "Response to Mr. Baldwin".] In "Miscellaneous
Written Materials" envelope in bottom drawer of Port Chicago Room file
cabinet, Naval Weapons Station Concord.
1989 Revised Preliminary Historic Resources Inventory, Contra Costa County,
California. For the Contra Costa County Community Development
Department in conjunction with the Revised Contra Costa County General
Plan. Contra Costa County Community Development Department, Martinez.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
16
Arnold. R. R., County Surveyor
1930 Official Map of Contra Costa County, California. Compiled from private
surveys and official records by R.R. Arnold, County Surveyor. Scale [ca.
1:70,400]. N.P., [Martinez, Calif.].
Bay Point Utilities Company
1920 History of the Water Supply System of the City of Bay Point. Bay Point
Utilities Company, Oakland.
Beck, W.A. and Y.D. Haase
1974 Historical Atlas of California (Third printing). University of Oklahoma Press,
Norman.
Bennyhoff, James A.
1977 Ethnogeography of the Plains Miwok. Center for Archaeological Research At
Davis Publication 5.
Bohak-el. Charles
1983 Memories of Bay Point/Port Chicago Linger. MS on file. Concord Historical
Society, Concord (as cited in Self et al. 1993).
Bolton. Herbert E.
1930 Anza's California Expeditions. Vols. III-IV. Font's.Complete Diary of the
Second Anza Expedition. University of California Press, Berkeley.
California (State of), Office of Historic Preservation (CAIJOHP)
1973a The California History Plan, Volume One - Comprehensive Preservation
Program. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Parks
and Recreation, Sacramento.
1973b The California History Plan, Volume Two - Inventory of Historic Features.
State of California. The Resources Agency, Department of Parks and
Recreation, Sacramento.
1976 California Inventory of Historic Resources. Resources Agency, Department of
Parks and Recreation, Sacramento.
1988 Five Views: An Ethnic Sites Survey for California. State of California, The
Resources Agency, Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento.
1.990a Minutes of the State Historical Resources Commission. November 2, 1990.
Including Appendix B. Listing of Properties on the National Register of
Historic Places, California Registered Historical Landmarks and California
Points of Historical Interest for 1990. Copy on file, Basin Research
Associates, San Leandro.
1990b California Historical Landmarks. Office of Historic Preservation, Department
of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento.
1991 Minutes of the State Historical Resource Commission for November 1, 1991,
Including 1991 Summaries of National Register of Historic Places, California
Registered Historical Landmarks and Points of Historical Interest Properties.
1992a California Points of Historical Interest. May 1, 199221
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
' 17
'
1992b Annual Report of the State Historical Resources ourc , Commission. Adopted
1 November 6, 1992. Including 1992 Summaries of National Register of
Historic Places, California Registered Historical Landmarks and Points of
Historical Interest Properties.
1993a Historic Properties Directory. State of California Department of Parks and
Recreation, Sacramento (as cited by the Northwest Information Center of the
Historical Resources File System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park).
' 1993b Minutes of the Quarterly Meeting of the State Historical Resource
Commission for February 5, May 6, August 6, and November 5, 1993.
Including status of applications for National Register of Historic Places,
California Registered Historical Landmarks and Points of Historical Interest
Properties,
1994 Minutes of the Quarterly Meeting of the State Historical Resource
Commission for February 18. 1994, May 19, 1994, and August 5, 1994 and
Notice of Hearing of the State Historical Resource Commission for November
I 4, 1994. Including status of applications for National Register of Historic
Places. California Registered Historical Landmarks and Points of Historical
Interest Properties.
Cartier, Robert
1985 Archival Study of the Cultural Resources of Four Candidate Sites for Navy
Family Housing in Alameda, San Francisco, and Marin Counties [sic: also
Contra Costa"]. MS on file, S-7730, California Archaeological Site Inventory,
Rohnert Park.
Coletta, Paolo E.
1985 United States Navy and Marine Corps Bases, Domestic. Greenwood Press,
Connecticut (as cited in Self et al. 'Q93).
Collier, George C.
v.d. Scrapbook of Material relating to Port Chicago. Nichols and Clyde. Calif.
Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley.
n.d. "Township 16". Typescript about Bay Point/Port Chicago, California. In
Scrapbook, v.d.
' 1970 Port Chicago -- It's Fate Again Back in the Limelight. MS on file. Concord
Historical Society (as cited in Self et al. 1993).
1983 A Narrative History of Contra Costa County. Super Print, El Cerrito.
Concord Transcript
1968 "Homeowners Angry & Embittered" by Norman Colby. March 13, 1968.
1969 "Port Chicago Residents Await Own Inevitable 'Dooms Day" by Dan Chabot.
January 7, 1969.
1969 "Port Chicago -- A Ghost Town of Our Times. Slice of Americana Vanishes
in Wake of Navy Bulldozers" by John Davidson. August 13, 1969.
j1969 "Ghost Town Rites for Port Chicago Church" August 13, 1969.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
18 ,
Contra Costa County Community Development Department (CCC/CDD).
1991 Contra Costa County General Plan 1990-2005. Contra Costa County
Community Development Department, Martinez.
1994? Blackline map. Draft Contra Costa County General Plan Land Use Element.
Scale not stated.
Contra Costa County Historical Society
1994 Contra Costa County Map of Historical Points of Interest: giving precise
locations of 195 sites of historical interest. Scale [ca. 1:96,000] (W 122016--
W 1210327N 38007'--N 37013'). The Society, [Martinez, Calif.].
Contra Costa County Planning Department
1976 Preliminary Historic Resources Inventory Contra Costa County, California
1976. Contra Costa County Planning Department, n.p.
[Contra Costa?] Morning News Gazette ,
1969 "Port Chicago Demolition Bid Readied." February 17, 1969.
Contra Costa Times
1967 "Port Chicagoans Vocal about Town's Qualities". May 14, 1967.
1969 "Dying Port Chicago Faces Rat Infestation" by Fran Dauth. January 6, 1969.
1969 "Going to Regional Parks S51 Worth of Port Chicago's Trees in '44 Find New
Homes." 3/13/69
1986 "Port Chicago" by Tim Roberts. 11/16/86 (as cited in McLeod 1994). ,
Cook. S.F.
1957 The Aboriginal Population of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, California.
University of California Anthropological Records 16(4).
Coy, W.C.
1973 California County Boundaries: A Study of the Division of the State into
Counties and the Subsequent Changes in their Boundaries (Revised edition).
California Historical Survey Commission. Valley Publishers, Fresno.
Dakin Publishing Co.
1886 Bay Point, Contra Costa Co., Cal.; Lake View, Santa Barbara Co., Cal. Scale
[1:600]. 50 ft. = 1 in. In California warehouse book. San Pablo, CA. Vlad
Shkurkin, c. 1983. p. 145.
Duff, Patricia J.
1991 Cultural Resources Survey Report, Remedial Action Subsite (RASS) 4, Naval
Weapons Station, Concord, California. Prepared for the Department of Navy,
Western Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command. San Bruno,
California. MS on file, S-12856, California Archaeological Site Inventory,
Rohnert Park.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES ,
' 19
Dunkel A.E.
1910 (Title information regarding Bay Point Townsite and Waterfront, formerly
known as the Neely Ranch.) Contra Costa Abstract & Title Company,
Martinez. On file, Contra Costa County Historical Society History Center,
Concord.
Elliot Publishing Company
1893 Contra Costa Co., Cal. (pamphlet including maps, illustrations, and text).
Reprinted 1988 by'the Contra Costa County Historical Society, n.p.
Elsasser, Albert B.
1978 Development of Regional Prehistoric Cultures. In California, edited by R. F.
Heizer, Volume 8. Handbook of North American Indians, W.G. Sturtevant,
general editor, pp. 37-57. 'Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C.
Emanuels, G.
1986 California's Contra Costa County: An Illustrated History. Panorama West
Books, Fresno.
jFahy. Leone
n.d. Port Chicago, The Little Town that Disappeared. MS, Contra Costa County
Library, n.p. (as cited in McLeod 1994).
Fickewirth, Alvin A.
1992 California Railroads: An Encyclopaedia of Cable Car. Common Carrier,
Horsecar, Industrial Interurban. Logging, Monorail, Motor Road, Short Lines.
Streetcar, Switching and Terminal Railroads in California 1851-1992. Golden
West Books, San Marino.
Frickstad. Walter N.
1 A Century of California Post Offices 1848 to 1954. A Philatelic Research
Society Publication, Pacific Rotaprinting Company, Oakland.
Goddard, George
1857 Britton & Rey's Map of the State of California. Britton and Rey, San
Francisco. Reprinted by The Friends of the Bancroft, University of California.
Berkeley.
Greenhorne & O'Mara. Inc.
1990 Guidance for Preparing Historic and Archeological Resources Protection Plans
at United States Navy Installations. Prepared for Naval Facilities Engineering
Command. On file at Western Division Offices. San Bruno.
tGudde. Erwin G.
1974 California Place Names: The Origin and Etymology of Current Geographical
Names (Third edition revised and enlarged). University of California Press,
Berkeley.
Hall Goodhue Haisley Barker(HGHB)
1989 Master Plan Naval Weapons Station Concord, Concord California. Western
Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFACENGCOM), San
Bruno. Contract N62474-86-C-1421. Hall Goodhue Haisley Barker, San
Francisco.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
20
Harding Lawson Associates (HLA)
1994 Revised West Cost Containerization Project Configuration. Naval Weapons
Station Concord, Contra Costa County, California. Dated November 18, 1994
(FAX).
Harlow, Neal
1950 The Maps of the San Francisco Bay from the Spanish Discovery in 1769 to the
American Occupation. The Book Club of California, San Francisco.
Hendry, G.W. and J.N. Bowman
1940 The Spanish and Mexican Adobe and Other Buildings in the Nine San
Francisco Bay Counties, 1776 to about 1950. MS on file, Bancroft Library,
University of California, Berkeley.
Historic Record Company
1926 History of Contra Costa County California with Biographical Sketches,
Historic Record Company, Los Angeles.
Hulaniski. F.J.
1917 The History of Contra Costa County California. Elms Publishing Company,
Berkeley.
Jennings, H.E_ Commander USN
1948 The Port Chicago, California Ship Explosion of 17 July 1944. Technical
Paper, Unclassified 3/29/57. Army-Navy Explosives Safety Board, 2045
Temporary Building No. 8, Washington, D.C. Copy secured from the Public
Affairs Officer, Naval Weapons Station, Concord.
Kroeber, A.L.
1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology
Bulletin 78. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
1932 The Patwin and Their Neighbors. University of California Publications in
American Archaeology and Ethnology 29(4):253-423.
Kyle. Douglas E.
1990 Historic Spots in California (Fourth edition of M.B. Hoover, H.E. Rensch and
E.G. Rensch). Stanford University Press, Stanford.
Levy, R.
1978 Eastern Miwok. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer, Volume 8. Handbook of
North American Indians, W.G. Sturtevant, general editor, pp. 398-413.
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Los Angeles Herald Examiner
1967 "Town Defies Navy, No Sale. Port Chicago Prefers Risk of Another Blast".
April 30, 1967.
McLeod, Dean L.
1994 Historical Time Line Bay Point and Vicinity 1772-1996. Draft dated 4/10/94.
MS on file, Contra Costa County Historical Society History Center, Concord.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
' 21
McMahon, Thomas Addis
1908 Official Map of Contra Costa County, California: compiled from private
surveys and official records by T.A. McMahon. Scale [1:47,520]. Britton &
Rey, (S[an] F[rancisc6].
Metcalfe, William L. (compiler)
1902 Contra Costa County Under the Vitascope (1994 Reprint of 1902 of Contra
Costa County, California as reviewed under.the Vitascope printed by Walter
N. Brunt,San Francisco). Highland Publishers, Pittsburg.
Miller. M. K. (Mortimer K.)
1908 Official Map of the city of Bay Point, : Contra Costa County, California. M.K.
Miller, Civil Eng'r. Scale [1:1,200]. 1 in. = 100 ft.. [California : s.n.].
ca. 1908- Official map of the City of Bay Point, : Contra Costa County, California.
1909 Scale [ca. 1:2,160] (W 12200111--W 1220011 1/N 3800246--N 3800246).
Spect & Shideler, San Francisco [between 1907 and 1909]. R.S. Kitchener,
Oakland.
Moratto. Michael J. with D.A. Fredrickson, C. Raven and Claude N. Warren
1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.
Munro-Fraser. J.P.
1882 History of Contra Costa County California. W.A. Slocum and Company, San
Francisco (reprinted 1974 by Brooks-Sterling Company, Oakland) (Note:
alternatively cited as Slocum 1882 by some authors).
' Oakland Tribune
1958 "Town Split over Sellout to Navy" by John Dengle. 1/2/58 (as cited in
' McLeod 1994).
1971 Photograph of St. Frances of Rome Catholic Church with caption "Relic of
City That Was". 6/22/71
Pacific Aerial Surveys
' 1992 Aerial photograph. vicinity of Port Chicago, Naval Weapons Station Concord,
Contra Costa County, California (Roll Number AV-4230. Exposure/Frame?
21 3). Scale 1:12000. Dated 7/7/92. Pacific Aerial Surveys. Oakland.
Pearson, Robert E
1964 No Share of Glory: The Untold Story of Port Chicago. Challenge, Pacific
Palisades, California.
' Pittsburg Post Dispatch
1969 "Town Raze Bids Sought." February 21, 1969.
1969 "Goodbye to A Post Office." June 11, 1969.
1969. "Port Chicago Injunction Lifted". June 30, 1969.
1969 "A Night of Terror 25 Years Ago Today". July 17, 1969.
1969 "90-Day Delay in Navy Suit". August 13, 1969.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
22
PRC Environmental Management. Inc. and William Self Associates
1992 Naval Weapons Station Concord, California. Final Cultural Resources Survey
Report Remedial Action Subsites (RASS) 1, 2, and 3. CLEAN Contract No.
N62474-88-D-5086. Contract Task Order 0174. PRC Environmental
Management, Inc., San Francisco and William Self Associates, Orinda.
Purcell, Mae Fisher
1940 History of Contra Costa County., Gillick Press, Berkeley.
Rego, Nilda
1990 Bay Point's Mill Survived Fearsome Fire. Contra Costa Times, August 26,
1990 (as cited in Self et al. 1993).
Sanborn Map Company [and Sanborn-Perris Map Company]
1912, 1919, Insurance Map of Bay Point, Contra Costa County, California. Sanborn
1925 Map Company, New York.
1945 Insurance Map of Port Chicago, Contra Costa County, California. Sanborn
Map Company, New York. 1925 Updated to 1945.
Sandow, George, C.E.
1899. Map Showing Portions of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, California.
Compiled from Official and Private Maps, Surveys and Data under Direction
of Theodore Wagner(publisher and date not included in detail illustrated in
Emanuels 1986).
Self. William
1989Mt. Diablo Creek Flood Control and Stream Stabilization Plan Archeological
Survey Report, Naval Weapons Station, Concord, Contra Costa County, CA.
Prepared for the Department of Navy, Western Division, Naval Facilities
Engineering Command, San Bruno, California. MS on file, S-13416,
California Archaeological Site Inventory, Rohnert Park.
1992 See PRC Environmental Management. Inc. and William Self Associates
above. Citation in Self et al. 1993:28 as 1992 with typographical error "Self
1991" on Table 2.
Self. William, Greg Matson, Carrie Wills. Norm Dyer and Ann Samuelson (Self et al.)
1993 Cultural Resources Overview Naval Weapons Station Concord Contra Costa
County, California. MS on file S-15500, California Archaeological Site
Inventory, Rohnert Park.
Sloan & Robson
1918 Map of Properties of Pacific Coast Shipbuilding Company : Contra Costa Co.,
Cal. Sloan & Robson, Engineers, March 1918. J.H. Marion, del, Scale (ca.
1:12,500).
Slocum. J.P. & Co.
1882 History of Contra Costa County California. W.A. Slocum and Company, San
Francisco (reprinted 1974 by Brooks-Sterling Company, Oakland) (Note:
alternatively cited as Munro-Fraser 1882 by some authors).
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
Smith and Elliott
1879 Illustrations;of Contra Costa Co. California with Historical Sketch
((Facsimile, 1952 edition). Contra County Historical Society. The
Sacramento Lithograph Co., Sacramento.
Smitten, Kenneth H.
1955 Appraisal of 528.80 acres, Tidal Marsh Area(in the) Vicinity of U.S. Naval
Magazine Port Chicago, Contra Costa County, California (January). For
' Twelfth Naval District.
1958 Appraisal of 135,352 acres, more or less, Tidal Marsh Area [in the] Vicinity of
U.S. Naval Magazine Port Chicago (as of March, 1958). For Twelfth Naval
' District.
Spect & Shideler(Firm)
' 1908? City of Bay Point [pamphlet including map]. Spect & Shideler, San Francisco.
Stewart, S.B.
1981 Archaeological Overview of Alameda, Contra Costa, and Marin Counties. In
Overview of Prehistoric Archaeology for the Northwest Region California
Archaeological Sites Survey, Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino. Lake,
Sonoma, Napa. Marin, Contra Costa, Alameda, pp. 4.0-4.75. MS on file,
California Archaeological Site Inventory, Rohnert Park.
1982 Prehistoric Overview Northwest Region: California Archaeological Inventory.
' Volume 4. Alameda, Contra Costa and Marin, D.A. Fredrickson, general
editor. Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert
Park.
' Terkel, Studs
1984 The G.;:�d War: An Oral History of World War Two. Pantheon Books, New
York (seg interview with Joseph Small, pp. 392-401).
United States Bureau of Ordnance
1945 Bureau of Ordnance: Selected Ammunition Depots. Volume II. First Draft
Narratives prepared by the Historical Section, Bureau of Ordnance. On file,
United States Naval Library, Washington, D.C. (as cited in Self et al. 1993).
United States Bureau of Yards and Docks
1947 Building the Navy's Bases in World War II: History of the Bureau of Yards
and Docks and the Civil Engineering Corps, 1940-1946. Volume 1. United
States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (as cited in Self et al.
' 1993).
United States Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers (US/Corps)
' 1980a San Francisco Bay to Stockton, California Intensive Cultural Resources
Survey and Literature Review of Four Additional Proposed Dredged Material
Sites in Contra Costa and Solano Counties; Final Report. MS on file, S-2180,
California Archaeological Site Inventory, Rohnert Park.
1980b San Francisco Bay to Stockton. California (John F. Baldwin and Stockton Ship
Channels) Avon to Stockton Interim General Design Memorandum
Appendices. Design Memorandum No. 1.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
24
United States. Congress. House. Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
1992 Port Chicago National Memorial Act of 1992. Report to accompany H.J. Res.
306) (including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office). 102d
Congress, 2d session, House of Representatives, pp.102-609. United States
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
United States Department of the Interior, National Register of Historic Places, National Park
Service (USNPS)
1994 National Register of Historic Places Index of Listed Properties; Index of
Determined Eligible Properties; and, Index of Properties Received/Pending. ,
Computer Printout dated 10/11/94 from National Register of Historic Places,
National Park Service,Washington, D.C. Copy on file, Basin Research
Associates, San Leandro.
United States Department of the Interior, Western Region, National Park Service
(USNPS/DPGEQ) '
1992 Memorandum to Chief, Planning/Environmental Review, Western Region.
From: Regional Archaeologist, WR. Subject: Aspects of Locating Quinalt
Victory and E.A. Bryan Vessels: Port Chicago Memorial Project (Martin
Mayer, Cultural Resource Management Specialist and Steve Haller, Park
Historian).
1993a Memorandum to File. From Chief,Division of Planning, Grants and ,
Environmental Quality. Subject: Key Points of January 7th Meeting with
Navy and Firms Group on Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial.
Dated January, 8, 1993.
1993b
Letter to File. From Chief, Division of Planning, Grants and Environmental
Quality. Subject: Design Concept Decision for Port Chicago Naval Magazine
National Memorial. Dated February 26, 1993. [Mentions survivor's focus
group.]
United States Department of the Interior, Western Region, National Park Service (USNPS- ,
WR/USNAV-CLAWS)
1993 DRAFT Comprehensive Plan and Environmental Assessment Port Chicago
Naval Magazine National Memorial, Contra Costa County, California (April)
Western Region, National Park Service and Concord Naval Weapons Station, ,
U.S. Navy.
United States (Department of the Navy), Naval Facilities Engineering Command '
(NAVFACENGCOM)
1967 The Port Chicago Story. NAVFACENGCOM. Typescript report in Jerome R.
Waldie Papers.
United States Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Western
Division (NAVFACENGCOM/WESTDIV)
n.d. Map. Pier and Part former Town of Port Chicago Grid System WPNSTA
Concord. Tidal Area. Naval Weapons Station, Concord, California.
NAVFAC No. 6012689. Copy on file, Basin Research Associates, San
Leandro.
1968a Map. Town of Port Chicago, Contra Costa County, California. Condemnation
Action No. 2 EFD DWG No. C-80047. NAVFAC Drawing No. 1115106.
Sheet 2 of 5. Scale 1" = 100'. Approved 9/19/68. ,
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
1968b Map. Town of Port'Chica o, Contra Costa County, California.]
Condemnation Action No. 2 EFD DWG No. C-80048. NAVFAC Drawing
No. H 15107. Sheet 3 of 5. Scale 1" = 100'. Approved 9/19/67. Changed
11/19/68.
United States Department of the Navy, Naval Weapons Station Concord (NWS Concord)
1987 Memorandum. To: 20. From: 09 C.Y. K. Ching. Subject: Waterfront
Soundings. Dated 2 October 1987.
United States Department of the Navy, Office of The Chief of Naval Operations
1990 OPNAVINST 5090.]A. Environmental and Natural Resources Program
Manual, dated 2 October 1990, Chapters 5, 19, and 20. United States
' Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
' 1898 Carquinez, Calif. (Quadrangle). Topographic map, 15 minute series. United
States Geological Survey, Menlo Park.
' 1901 Carquinez, Calif. [Quadrangle]. Topographic map. 15 minute series. United
States Geological Survey, Menlo Park (reprinted 1926).
1947 Carquinez, Calif. (Quadrangle). Topographic map, 1:50,000. United States
' Geological Survey, Menlo Park.
1951 Vine Hill, Calif. (Quadrangle). Topographic map. 7.5 minute series, 1:24,000.
' United States Geological Survey, Menlo Park.
1980 Vine Hill, Calif. (Quadrangle). Topographic map, 7.5 minute series. United
States Geological Survey, Menlo Park (1959 photorevised).
United States Geological Survey with the Department of Housing and Urban Development
(USGS/HUD)
1970 Vine Hill, Calif. (Quadrangle). Orthophoto map, 7.5 minute series; 1:24,000.
United States Geological Survey, Menlo Park.
' United States War Department, Corps of Engineers, United States Army (US War Dept)
1940 Carquinez Strait, Calif. [Quadrangle]. Topographic map, 15 minute series.
United States Geological Survey, Menlo Park (reprinted 1963).
Vogel, Peter
1982 The Last Wave From Port Chicago. The Black Scholar Journal of Black
Studies and Research 13(2-3):30-47.
[C.F.] Weber & Co.
ca. 1914 Weber's Map of Contra Costa County, California. Scale (ca. 1:130,000) (W
122026--W 121032/N 38007--N 37043). C.F. Weber& Co., San Francisco.
West, G.J. and P.D. Schultz.
1975 An Archeological Survey of the Stockton Ship Channel Dredged Material
Disposal Sites, False River Cut-Off, Levee Setback Sites, and U.S. Navy
Lands at Port Chicago. MS on file, United States Army Corps of Engineers,
Sacramento, California (as cited in Self et al. 1993.: Not on file at the NW1C).
BASIL RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
26
Western Railroad ,
1968 That was the Road That Was. Western Railroad, April 3, 1968 (in Collier v.d.)
Whalen, Robert
"Birth and Incorporation". MS on file, Contra Costa Historical Society (as
cited variant in Self et al. 1993).
Young, Andrew
1991 Ways Back: Historical Societies and Their Resources in Contra Costa County.
The Contra Costa County Historical Society, Concord.
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
i 9.0 ATTACHMENTS .
9.1 APPENDIX I: FIGURES
' FIGURE 1 GENERAL PROJECT LOCATION
FIGURE 2 PROJECT AREA LOCATION
FIGURE 3 PROJECT AREA IN 1914 (C.F. Weber & Co. 1914)
' FIGURE 4A SANBORN INSURANCE MAP AREAS ((USGS Vine Hill,
Calif. 1951 with Miller ca. 1908-1909, Sanborn 1912, 1919,
' 1925, 1945; HLA 1994b)
FIGURE 4B SCHEMATIC - SANBORN INSURANCE MAP AREAS
((USGS Vine Hill, Calif. 1951 with Miller ca. 1908-1909,
Sanborn 1912, 1919, 1925, 1945, HLA 1994b)
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
29 YOLO 0 i
1 I
128
NAPA '•, 505
' 101
SONOMA
I
\ I
l
so
SOLANO
680
_
MART
24 CONTRA
68o COSTA '
S.F. \
lop,
�: 580 i -
--
A 1
'. I
LAMEDA
0 ,
cep ' g2 880'
... . . . . . ..:. .
....... .:.. ..:...
280
1
1 101
C
SAN LARA� SANTA
MATE O
I .
\\, SANTA
CRUZ
101
Figure 1: General Project Location
i
1
S'UISUn Bay
' Ammunition Pier 3
1 -
r
;—Rail Interchange Yard
' Potential Development -Envelope
lrGOa
Rail and Truck
Explosive Yard
ConceptualConfiguration
, .
l°�
F°rt C1hicogo H,ghwoy
°
Z.
4
v
i
r
o
o =soo 30312 Naval Weapons Station Concord
Containerization Project
SCALE ;r: FEET �v
Figure 2: Project Area Location
CO
,����'-Arc``' • 1114 ,�;,-``"„►-�-
Till
PAP
y : - fit
lik
.�r •'�� `�"` o J" ;';ter• 1-•�
Ogg f ��
Waol
Ul
ANN--
TA
'��
i�
• .,fir. •1 ,,1,.
AVAL - : ... .: R ...EE . V
- -
1- 0G.
N ....
.Z.
I ' ••
{0 PROJECT AREA
o 0 00
o •
s n
II
� i I
'P
I
...::::...:::::::.:.... ..
1
_, # ;. 11
as rsss: s > >: Vit ;': • % 1l
goes Be:
-.I o
ease Bass
......::..:......
I
t '
l • •::: :
1gas • ,i
200 �.._./
fir- -77
BLOCKS ILLUSTRATED (�..�
Sanborn 1912
' Sanborn 1919 I 0 FEET 2000
Sanborn 1925, 1945
J "jam 0 METERS 600
Figure 4A: Sanborn Insurance Map Areas (USGS Vine Hill, Calif. 1951 with
Miller ca. 1908-1909; Sanborn 1912, 1919, 1925,1945; HLA 1994b)
This Page Left
Intentionally Blank
1
A
co
H
' PROJECT AREA
N P PG�F�G ,• ..
a
ti
V
N
O
S
S
F
P
2
Z
2
Q
O
2
O
2
Q ..
Q.
V
Q
r N
BLOCKS ILLUSTRATED
' E] Sanborn 1912
Sanborn 1919 0 PEE T 2000
Q Sanborn 1925, 1945
0 . TERS 600
Figure 4B: Sanborn Insurance Map Areas (USGS Vine Hill, Calif. 1951 with
' Miller ca. 1908-1909; Sanborn 1912, 1919, 1925,1945; HLA 1994b)
9.2 APPENDIX II: LISTS ,
LIST II-1 INDIVIDUALS, GROUPS, AND AGENCIES CONTACTED ,
LIST II-2 PROJECT PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS
BASF RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
LIST 11-1
INDIVIDUALS, GROUPS, AND AGENCIES CONTACTED
United States Department of the Navy, Naval Weapons Station Concord (NWS Concord),
Concord, CA 94520
Mr. Rafael Bravo 510) 246-5725
Mr. Sam Evans* (510) 246-5673 Bldg IA-15
Mr. Rich Pieper* (510) 246-5650 Bldg IA-15
Ms. Anna Lou Proctor (510) 246-5592 Bldg IA-10
Mr. Billy Wheeler (510)246-5725
Ms. Linda Zuckem (510) 246-5591 Bldg IA-10
* Point of Contact individuals:
RE: NWS Concord access and available documents.
Bravo: Previous research limited to history of actions involved in purchase of additional land.
Evans: Background material on NWS Concord, Pier 3 and Town of Port Chicago as well facility
L_ -
access and camera pass; referred to Real Estate at WESDfV Code 24 for condemnation records.
Pieper: Provided map of part of NWS Concord grid system-, access to relevant EIRs, EAs, etc.
for NWS Concord and information about past dredging.
Proctor (Office of Public Affairs): Files have primarily articles on explosion; referred to R.
Pieper, Naval Facilities Engineering Command in San Bruno, and local libraries as sources of
information; provided phone number for retired employee Mr. J. Dan Tik-alsy who noted the
existence of a list of 1944 explosion survivors'for which location.is unknown by Office of Public
Affairs.
Zuckern (Office of Public Affairs): Provided access to Port Chicago Room at NWS Concord
Z_
(miscellaneous documents and a few artifacts including four fragments of 1944 explosion
plating/metal): no additional historical or cultural resource related materials are available at
NWS Concord.
United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service
Western Region National Register Programs
600 Harrison Street Suite 600
San Francisco, CA 94107-1372
(415) 744-3916
Mr. Leo Barker Historical archaeologist
Mr. Gordon Chapell Historian (Suite 560)
Dr. Roger Kelly Historical archaeologist
RE: Information about Port Chicago background research, National Register of Historic Places
status and programs; 12/01/94 review of materials assembled for Port Chicago Memorial
and confirmed that the 1944 explosion is the significant event in the project area; Historic
Resources Study of Port Chicago low priority. some documentation has also been
assembled by Eugene O'Neill National Historic Site, which is responsible for the memorial
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
' Appendix 11 - Lists, Page 2
Office of Historic Preservation
State Department of Parks and Recreation
P.O. Box 942896
Sacramento, CA 94296-0001
(916) 653-8902
Ms. Cynthia Howse
RE: Information about Port Chicago National Register Status
Mr. William Self
William Self Associates
P.O. Box 2192
Orinda, CA 94563
1 (510) 631-0342
RE: Copies of NWS Concord reports; rationale for absence of Historic Resources Inventory
Form for piers; confirmed that Port Chicago area not systematically surveyed (Self et al.
1 1993:17 "cursory survey") and site form not done; obsidian biface is located inland near
two springs in sensitive #21 area
' Northwest Information Center of the Historical Resources Information System (NWIC)
Department of Anthropology
' Sonoma State University
Rohnert Park, CA 94928
(707) 664-2494
' RE: Cultural resources recorded in project and vicinity
National Register Information System Data Base
United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service
P.O. Box 37127
' Washington, D.C. 20013-7127
(202) 343-9559
Mr. Jeffery Yokel
RE: National Register of Historic Places status of Port Chicago
Mr. J. Dan Tikalsy (retired)
Former Public Affairs Officer
' NWS Concord
(510) 778-2373 (home)
RE: Request for information about how former Port Chicago buildings demolished, removed.
' etc. -- He stated that most bulldozed. holes excavated and demolition debris buried
according to residents.
' BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
Appendix 11 - Lists, Page 3
Asked if Port Chicago had any black residents, relationships, businesses, etc.: He noted
severe racial problems with town of Port Chicago. Believes that AfroAmericans lived on
base and the sailors had special busses to Richmond and Pittsburg.
He is of the opinion that school is historically important and should be retained. The
railroad depot was reportedly cut in half and moved to Fairfield area with old trains. The
Catholic Church was moved to West Pittsburg/Bay Point area, and original brig for Naval
Magazine was relocated to Tidal gate area on left where trucks are inspected. There is
reportedly part of a hulk of World War I ship near the Port Chicago memorial area. The
gnarled pilings are part of the 1880s pier with Bay Point and Clayton Railroad tracks to
Crossings in Concord. He also noted that unexploded ordnance may exist and that the
contractor during dredging for the US Corps ca. 5-6 years ago complained of unexploded
ordnance and metal plugging equipment. He has been in contact with Vogel who has
recanted his theory on the explosion of a nuclear device at Port Chicago [to some degree],
but can't get published. The list of survivors of the explosion is on base in his old
computer. He provided names of Bob Anderson (currently works in the waterfront who
lived in and attended Port Chicago School), Claude Ellington (retired real estate broker,
Oak-land resident), Dewitt Jameson and Morris Sublet (residents of either Oakland or
Richmond) who left the military/area shortly after the 1944 explosion.
Mr. Tikalsy provided other possible research leads in addition to National Archives in San
Bruno which includes information on the District Public Works and Mare Island; he knows
the location of various documents but is no longer working at base. he could provide
information as a consultant or possibly after 12/20 if hired as subcontractor for NWS
Concord.
Western Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command
P.O. Box 737, Code 2033
San Bruno. CA 94066
(415) 244-3719
Mr. Louis S. Wall Community Planner
RE: Copy of Self et al. 1993 report and guidance concerning individuals and agencies to
contact.
Ms. Betty Maffei, Director
Mr. Andrew Young
Contra Costa County Historical Society History Center (CCCoHS/HQ
1700 Oak Park Boulevard (Room C-5)
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
(510)-939-9180
1 1
RE: Background material on Port Chicago and Bay Point
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES,
' Appendik 11 _ Lists, Page 4
NOT CONTACTED
1
County of Contra Costa Assessors Office (CCCoAO)
834 Court Street
Martinez, CA
County of Contra Costa Recorder's Office (CCCoRO)
111 Ward Street
Martinez, CA
' Ms. Jean Bulman
Concord Historical Society Landmark Coordinator
' Chair of City of Concord Long Range Planning
Mr. James R. Serventi
Concord Historical Society
P.O. Box 404
Concord, CA 94522
Concord Historical Society - Concord History Research Center
i 1601 Sutter Street, Suites E & F
Concord, CA 94520
(510) 827-3380
(510) 685-7363 (Bulman home)
(510) 685-7376 (Serventi home)
' Eugene O'Neill National Historic Site
P.O. Box 280
Danville. CA 94526
(510) 943-1531
RE: administers the Port Chicago National Memorial for the National Parks Service
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
Appendix II - Lists, Page 5
LIST 11-2
PROJECT PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS
Busby, Colin I. PhD 1978
University of California at Berkeley
Archaeology, Ethnology,
Western North America,
Cultural Resource Management
Garaventa, Donna M. PhD 1977
University of California at Berkeley
Archaeology, Material Culture,
North America, Andean South America
Guedon, Stuart A. MA 1978
California State University, Hayward
Historical Geography, Cartographer
Tannam. Melody E. BA 1988 Anthropology
MA in Progress - City and Regional Planning/
Landscape Architecture
University of California at Berkeley
Human Osteology, Cartography, Illustrator
BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
i
1
1
9.3 APPENDIX III: SELECTED TEXT
The Port Chicago, California Ship Explosion of 17 July 1944
(Commander H.E. Jennings, USN 1948)
1
' BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
i�
1
' THE PORT CHICAGO, CALIFORNIA
SHIP EXPLOSION OF 17 JULY 1944
r
i
BY
' COMMANDER H. E. JENNINGS, USN
WASHINGTON
UNITED STATES NAVY
1948
1
1
- COPY
TECHNICAL PAPER
Unclassified
3/29/57 n v
1O N
ASESB CDR H. E. JENNINGS, USN K
COPY
THE PORT CHICAGO, CALIFORNIA, SHIP EXPLOSION
OF '
17 JULY 1944 '
1
COPY
ARMY-NAVY EXPLOSIVES SAFETY BOARD, 2045 TEMPORARY BUILDING NO. 8
WASHINGTON, D. C.
COPY
:53-5066
-s U
N TIKALSKY
Public Affairs Officer
'f NAVAL WEAPONS STATION
CONCORD. CA 94520 _ ,ti'1 ' �-=,,� !►
Reproduced November 1992 r
he
By the Office of the Regional Historian X �Kns.
Division of Park Historic Preservation '; s�
t'{
Western Regional Office c.
National Park Service '
San Francisco, California `�
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Summary 0 C. 0 0
1. The U. S. Naval Magazine, Port Chicago', California 0 1
2. Factual Details Immediately Prior to the Explosion 2
a. Ships and Pier, o o o 2
b. Immediate Vicinity of the Pier 0 0 0 0 2
3. The Explosions. 0 0 0 0 3
4. Damages as a Result of the Explosions 0 4
a. Personnel Deaths o o 0 4
b. Personnel and Civilian Injuries o 5
c. Property Damage 0 6
5. Boards of Investigation o o 0 7
a. U. S. Navy Board of. Investigation o 0 7
bo U. S. Navy Court of Inquiry o o 7
Army-Navy Explosives Safety Board . o w 8
II.. Empirical Analysis of Damage Claims against the Government . 8
III. Structural Damage 0 .0 11
lo Naval Magazine. o 0 11
a. Loading Pier and Ships. 0 11
bo Marginal Pier0 12
c. Joiner Shop 0 •
*o 15
d. Inert-Storage Area. 0 0. 15
(1) Summary 0 16
e. Revetment Area.. • 0 .0 18
f. Barracks and Administration Area o o 21
2. Waters Adjacent to the Naval Magazine . 23
a. Ships in Channel. 0 0 0 23
b. Roe Island Lighthouse o 0 27
3. Southern Cities and Towns . 27
TABLE OF CONITEIITS (Cont'd.)
Pale
a. Port Chicago 27
(1) Structural Damage 28
(a) Partially Collapsed Structures 28
(b) Buildings other than Houses 30
(c) Houses 32
(d) Automobiles 35
(e) Summary 36
b. Clyde « 36
c. Concord and Vicinity and Hookston 38
4. Western Cities and Towns 40
a. Avon. . 40
Vicinity
b. Martinez and 41
ci Benecia.- 42
(1) Benecia Residential. 42
(2) Benecia Arsenal. 43
d. Port Costa 44
e. Crockett 44
5. Eastern Cities and Towns 45
a. Nichols. 45
b. Shell Point Plant 0 0 46
c. Enos Ambrose and other Subdivisions. 47
d. Pittsburg 48
6. Northern Cities and Towns 48
7. Summary and Conclusions, 49
IV, Superficial Damage o 0 50
V. Glass Breakage 52
1. Window Glass 52
2. Plate Glass. 54
3, Flying Glass
55
VI, Personal Property Damage 58
1. Household Furnishings 58
2. Merchandise. 59
i
1
1
TABLE OF CONITENTS (Cont'd. )
Page
VII. "Safety" Distances - Relative Protection from Damage 60
1
1. American . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2. British . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *. . . : : 68-
3. Conclusions and Recommen'datio'ns 71
VIII. Appendix - -
A. Exhibits l. - .16, inclusive
B. Missile Analysis
C. Suisun Bay Crater
1. In Mud Bottom
2. In Hard Bottom
D. Origin and Number of Explosions
E-1 Summary of Structurally1mage from Pier to 70,000 Feet
and the Parameter RW-
E-2 Summary of Deaths and,�V uries from Pier to 66,000 Feet
and the Parameter RW"
F. Selected Index
(3) Saw funnel-shap d area 200 feet in air, ,on top of
which was bow oef ship with mast attached,
(4) In first flash saw shoreline and inside ship, in ,
second explosion the inside ship and pier seemed
to go together,
(5) Could see outline of. dock and ship, looked like
center of fireworks mostly on the ship that hadn' t
gone up yet. (inbound ship, E. A. Bryan)
b. Roe Island Lizhthouse.
On Roe Island directly across the channel and 3,280 feet
from the pier, a lighthouse was occupied by the keeper, his wife, two
children, and an assistant keeper. The keeper, his wife, and the
assistant keeper at the time of the explosion were in the kitchen in
the rear of the house. The first explosion knocked out the navigation
light, broke all windows in the house, blew furniture about and shook
the house violently. Although the two children were showered with I
glass neither one. had a single scratch. The .assistant keeper and the.
parents of the children likewise were -not injured.
C As. meAtioned Previously,-'the keeper of the light testified
As to his recollections while-in the kitchen during the first explosion
and during the second explosion while looking out the upstairs window,
especially as to the 20 to 30 foot water wave coming toward the light-
house from the direction of the pier. Although this unusual water wave
for Suisun Bay put the lighthouse boat 40 feet back on the beach and
tore down bulkheads, there was no evidence of oil sprayed on Roe Island.
On the other hand, the Y. P. Miahelo II patrol boat was sprayed heavily
with fuel oil, apparently by either the same or similar water wave that
was observed by the lighthouse keeper.
A large number of missiles were found on Roe Island includ-
ing several lengths of railroad car rails and many pieces which were
recognized as parts of railroad cars. The significance of these particu-
lar missiles in relation to the possible origin of the explosions will be
considered later in the section on missiles. Some parts of the bodies of
the loading details and ships' crews were recovered on Roe Island. Some
parts were washed on the island probably by the so-called "tidal wave"
and other parts probably were blown directly on the island by the force
of the explosion.
3. Southern Cities and Towns
a. Port Chicaeo.
The town of Port Chicago, lying adjacent to the barracks and
administration area of the Naval Magazine and 1 to 2 miles from the
. 27 '
loading pier, not only received extensive damage from the blast wave but
also was hit by scattered missiles from the exploding ship. Although the
main street of Port Chicago was roughly parallel to the direction of the
blast wave, many occupants of commercial buildings suffered extensive
damage to merchandise by the breakage of large plate glass windows and
in some cases by the pressure wave knocking stocks from shelves and show
cases. Window glass breakage, plaster damage and other superficial dam-
age, and personal property damage to household furniture was extensive in
the residential parts of the town.
Since Port Chicago was the nearest inhabited area without the
' government reservation and therefore was in the critical zone for damage
criteria, the claims were tabulated and their locations were spotted on
a map accurately so as to determine all possible relationship for delinea-
tion of blast damage. -
(1) Structural Damage.
(a) Partiallv collapsed structures.
Along the railroad track between the southern
boundary of the Naval Magazine and the northern
boundary of Port Chicago were several buildings
Cwith partially collapsed roofs and sides. Some
of these were the railroad station of the South-
ern Pacific; oil storage tanks and warehouses;
and a large warehouse situated at the northern
end of Bay View Avenue. The freight section of
the station of the Southern Pacific Railroad col-
lapsed causing damage estimated to be about $4000.
Four oil storage tanks and an oil storage ware-
house situated about 700 feet west of the S.P.R.R.
Depot and 4650 feet from the pier were damaged ex-
tensively. The tops of the oil tanks, which did
not contain rafters, were buckled by the pressure
wave and could be repaired only by removing the
tops, straightening and replacing them. The oil
storage warehouse, a single-story frame construc-
tion with gable roof, 20' x 30' , windowless and
with long side to the north, was damaged as follows:
Corrugated iron on roof buckled,
Studs in N & E walls shattered,
Top plate on N & E walls broken,
Roof trusses shattered,
Rafters, purlines and chords broken.
The north wall had to be rebuilt but the roof usses
could be repaired in place. The total damage ;as
estimated to be about $1040.
28
A large warehouse at the north end of Bay View
Avenue was built in 1930 with second hand lumber I
in framework and trusses and the roof was renewed
in 1942; however, it was in good condition although .
the framework of the structure was dry and brittle
The building was in two sections with "A" type roof
truss construction. The maiti warehouse was a frame
building with part galvanized and part redwood
sheathing with a built-up paper roof. One of the
buildings was 51' X 82' , the other 48' x 821 . The
west half of the roof was caved in and all of the
galvanized iron walls were blown off. It was
necessary to tear down that part of the warehouse
which had not collapsed. The warehouse was rebuilt
upon the undamaged foundations and decking. The
warehouse contained miscellaneous equipment such as
household goods, commercial and store stocks. The
total damage was about $9,400, of which $6,900 was
damage to real property and $2,500 was damage to
personal property.
Other partially collapsed structures in the mai
part of Port Chicago were the theater on Main Stree ,
N a garage across the street from the theater, and a
shop at the corner of Main and Lind Streets. The
Port Chicago Theater, a one-story frame, 120' X 34'
was built with front and north' sides of stucco, rear
and south sides of wood sheathing, and the roof wit
composition 3-ply mineral surface. It had a seatin
capacity of 386 and was built in year 1928. The
theater was about 78 per cent damaged as follows:
Front wall No damage
South wall Bulged out
Rear wall Bulged out
North wall* Pushed in at center, could
not be retained
Roof Collapsed the following day,
could not be retained
Floor Slight damage
Foundation Undamaged
Heating system Slight damage
Plumbing Slight damage
Lumber Salvaged for scaffolding
i_
* Facing direction of explosion and with open space for three blocks.
29 '
It was reported that there were 195 people in
the theater at the time of the explosion; however,
only two people were injured by plaster falling
from the ceiling. Fortunately, the roof and ceil-
ing did not collapse for some time because it was
supported by the partially collapsed northern wall.
Since the portions of the structure left standing
could not be retained in the building they were
torn down for safety and the entire building was
reconstructed. Ceiling joists, floor joists,
plates, girders and studs failed. The breaking of
truss members and rafters caused the partial col-
lapse of the roof. The total damage to the theater
and contents was estimated at $14,210, Of which
.$12,965 was real property and $1,245 was personal
property. A garage, across the street from the
Port Chicago Theater, had a portion of its roof and
the rear wall collapse by the failure of rafters,
supports, coli—ns, studs, braces and joists. It
was necessary to rebuild the damaged portions at a 'It.
cost of $2,500.
A shop at the corner of Lind and Main Streets,
vacant. at the time.of the explosion, was completely
collapsed. with the roof lying •on the ground. The
appraisers allowed only 50 per cent of the cost to
replace the shop because of the apparent pre-explo-
sion state of maintenance.
(b) Buildings other than Houses.
The buildings of the town of Port Chicago which
received the greatest damage, excluding those pre-
viously stated as partially collapsed, were:
$30,000 Port Chicago Hotel
15,000 Bay Point Grammar School
10,000 Veterans Memorial Bldg.
6,000 Bay View Hotel
6,000 Drugstore & Residence, 115 Main St.
6,000 Stores & Apartment, 112 Main St.
6,000 Liliac Court Apartments
4,000 Seelys Inn
The roof of the Chicago Hotel, at the corner of
Main and -arroll '--reets, was damaged so extensively,
that it necessary to remove and rebuild the
entire r including the extension of eight brick
chimneys :om the ceiling line. The rebuilding of
the roof and ceiling required 86 new rafters, six
30
7
braces, four ceiling joists, and six skylights. It-
was necessary to replace 50 per cent of the 1" x 1
sheathing. The brick veneer of the store fronts al
the wood siding on the seconql floor was sprung.
It was necessary to replace twenty-two plate glass
windows, eight wire, twenty-one double thickness, f
and one hundred and forty single thickness window
panes. The appraised total damage of $30,234 was
allocated as follows:
Real Property
T1216 Structural
24510 Superficial
1278 Glass
Personal Property
$ 3230
$30234 Total
The total damage of $14,645 to the Bay Point
Grammar. School was allocated as follows:
Real Property
$ 420 Structural
13508 Superficial
260 Glass
Personal Property
$ . 457
$ 14645 Total
The structural members damaged were rafters,
trusses, chords, and joists. The superficial dam-,
. age included complete doors, windows, sash and
frames, electric fixtures, roofing, celetex and
canvas wainscoting.
The Veterans Memorial-Building was damaged
severely, and the total cost of repair of $10,130
was allocated as follows: ,
^ , Real Property
( $ 820 Structural
9010 Superficial
300 Glass
$10130 Total
31
i
Roof trusses collapsed end rafters, joists, purlins,
and plates were broken. The superficial damage
' 4 required the replacement of complete doors, jambs,
and windows, repair of plaster, linoleum, the heat-
ing and ventilation systems, ,.the replacement of
venetian blinds and :shades and some repair of the
roof and stucco. Practically all glass was broken.
s The Bay View Hotel, situated to the west of the
Port Chicago Hotel and on the northern boundary of
Port Chicago, had damage of $5,552 which is allocated
as follows;
Real Property
$ 520 Structural
4095 Superficial
580 Glass
Personal Property
357
$ 5552. Total
,�• The structural damage included studs, rafters, .joists
and displaced partitions. The superficial damage
required some new doors, jambs, frames, and windows;
repairs to roofing and plumbing; and some new electri
light fixtures and shades. It was necessary to re-
place ten plate glass and fifty-three single thicknes
- window glass.
_ (c) Houses.
An indication of the magnitude and type of damage
to houses in Port Chicago is shown by the following
table which is based upon the percentage damage to
all houses.
I •
32
Per Cent Type of Damage
90 Rafter
87 Door
78 Window Sash
70 Plaster or Paper
57 Roof
40 Chamney '
37 Joists
33 Studs
22 Siding
21 Plumbing
16 Wall board
9 Electric Fixtures
5-8 Ceiling; sheathing; foundation; floor
Less than 3 Bulged walls; porches
In addition, the average house in Port Chicago had
. eighteen panes of glass broken. Exclusive of per
sonal property damage it is estimated that the
average house was damaged to the extent of $1030,
. . or if it: is *a'ssumed that the average house was -
worth about $6000 the damage would be 20 per cent.
' The following table shows the frequency distri-
bution of dollar damage by number of houses includ-
ing personal property where owner of furniture was
likewise the owner of property.
Dollar Damage Interval Number of Houses
0 - 250 43 '
250 - 500 45
500 - 750 45
750 - 1000 44
1000 - 1250 37
1250 1500 31
1500 - 1750 24
1750 2000 15
2000 - 2250 5
2250 - 2500 3
2500 - 2750 0
2750 - 3000 0
Over - 3000 2 '
The above may be summarized as follows:
33
1
Dollars Per Cent of Total Houses
0 - 1000 60.2
1000 .- 2000 36.4
Over- 2000 3.4
100.0
An analysis of dollar damage to houses in relation
to distance from the pier indicates a decrease with
greater distance. Five arcs were drawn from the
center of the pier to divide the town of Port
Chicago at .5200, 5725, 6275, 6800, and 7350 feet,
respectively. On the basis of this division, the
following results were obtained:
Between Percentage of Average damage of all
the Arcs houses with $1000 houses including
or more damage personal property
(Feet) (per cent) (dollars)
• 5200 - 5725 64 968
5725 - 6275 55 987
_ 6275 - 6800- 58 1084 -
6800 - 7350 12 752
Greater than - 7350 0 286
On example of serious blast damage to homes was
a bungalow on Minnesota Avenue which was unprotected
from the blast wave and 5725 feet from the pier.
The front of the house was blown in, the water lines
were broken and the husband and wife were knocked
unconscious. A piece of steel weighing about forty
pounds fell through the mattress of the unoccupied
baby crib. Personal property of this couple alone
was damaged to the extent of $520. Fortunately,
the couple and their six children did not receive
any serious injuries.
Most of the houses in Port Chicago were situated
west of Main Street and had many well-developed
trees surrounding the houses. There were, however,
several exposed groups of houses which received, on
the average, greater damage than those of the built-
up areas. Prominent among these exposed areas were:
Distance from Pier (ft.
The 300 block of East B:: ::ss ::: . _et 5800
The Poplar Avenue devel !nt west
of Bay View Avenue 7100
34
In the former were four houses that had damages of 2280, 2026, 1979, ands
l 1454 dollars, respectively, as compared with an average of $987 for their
zonal arc. In the latter were several houses with damages from $1,000 to
$1,550 compared with an average of $752 for their zonal arc.
Although the amount of damage to individual houses from west
tn east across the town fluctuates, there is,. nevertheless, an apparent
trend of increased damage to the east. For example, along Lind Street,
from west to east, the superficial damage to houses was as follows: '
Houses Average
1 to 9 inc. $ 368 ,
10 to 19 inc. 890
20 to 30 inc. 841
31 to 41 inc. 1191
In Port Chicago 43- per cent of all houses faced north, 28 per cent faced
south, 15 per cent faced east and 15 per cent- faced west.
(d) Automobiles.
riany automobiles in Port Chicago were damaged by
the blast wave and some by missiles. Steed, tops were ma"shed in, windows
broken, doors sprung, £=oats and fendeps. dehted. For example, an auto-
mobile parked beside the Southern Pacific Depot had a.3 inch diameter.
hole torn in its steel body by the penetration of a metal slug; the ribs
in top were broken; doors were sprung and all glass was broken. Another
car, parked in front of the depot, had its top and sides blown in,' all
glass broken and upholstery out. A woman occupant of this car was not
injured. A car, parked across the street from the theater, was struck by
a missile, and two doors, a running board, and a door post were crushed.
A two-ring circus was in town the night of the
explosion and the .damage to their trailer equipment was surveyed by
experienced men from a nearby government installation. It was verified
. that nineteen tires were destroyed on twelve of the eighteen trailers;
two tires were destroyed on each of seven trailers, and one tire was
destroyed on each of five trailers. The claims for damages to automo-
biles parked on the streets of Port Chicago did not indicate that any
tires were destroyed either by missiles or.by the blast wave.
Similarly, a station wagon carrying Navy personnel '
was about 3700 feet from the center of the pier at the time of the first
explosion. The station wagon was rocked on its sides, none of the windows
were broken, and the tires did not blow out. A large number of automobiles
within the Naval Magazine grounds, were damaged but it was not possible to !
determine from the reports of damage any specific types such as to automo-
bile tires.
F� 35
This phase of damage to tires appears important
because although the present types of automobiles with steel bodies and
safety glass may protect their occupants on a public highway from serious
injury as a direct result of an explosion, nevertheless, if the blast
wave or suction wave could cause the driver to lose control either by a
sudden violent shaking of the automobile or by the blowing out of tires ,
' the occupants probably would receive serious injuries or death.
(b) Summary.
In the town of Port Chicago only one building, an
unoccupied shop wh'c acked proper maintenance, completely collapsed. A
large storehouse in fair condition partially collapsed and the remainder
' had to be torn down. The side wall of a- theater partially collapsed but
the patrons vacated the building before the roof fell. Sever L_4on-r1y
constructed frame buildings, used for commercial purposes, had partially
collapsed side walls and roofs. As a whole, structural damage .to all
types of buildings was mainly to the roof and associated members and was
minor as compared with the dollar amount of superficial and glass damage. .:
The injuries associated. with structural damage
were few. The magnitude of personal property damage by broken glass,
flying glass, and broken doors indicates, however, the possibility of a
greater number and more serious injuries if the explosion had occurred
r when people were active and walking in rooms rather than late at night
when most people had retired. The greater protection of a horizontal
position and lack of panicky actions no doubt resulted in the low injury
rate. There is evidence that many of the windows and doors had blown in
before the occupants were aroused sufficiently to move about and be sub-
jected to the hazards of the second explosion.
b. Clvde
The town of Clyde, with a population of 450, is situated
south of Port Chicago and is 2 to 2.6 miles from the center of the former
pier. It was shielded partly by the southern and western slopes of a
hill that has an elevation of 50 to 250 feet above sea level. As a result
of this shielding the damage to the town of Clyde, as compared with other
towns of similar distance from the pier, was less severe and consequently
the damage data appears abnormal on all charts and tables.
The houses of the town of Clyde were built by the government
during World War I for the employees of a company that had a shipyard lo-
cated close the s to of the former pier. During 1919 to 1931 only about
one-third :ie ho-:..c were rented but after that time they were renovated
for greats: :.upanc*.. At the time of the explosion the plaster and decora-
tions were need of much repair.
36
VI. Personal Property Damage.
1. Household Furnishings.
The two most important groups of personal property damage were
(1) household furniture and furnishings, and (2) merchandise in store
windows and on shelves. Other cases of personal property claims were:
$250 for young turkeys in a hatchery in the vicinity of ,Martinez; many
cases of furniture damaged from soot; bureau burned by overturned candle; ,
canary killed - Concord; chickens killed - Concord; 2,700 chicken eggs
and 100 Pheasant eggs, unsuitable for hatching - Concord; turkey eggs -
Concord; laying pullets killed by shock - Concord; clothing worn by ,
individuals who were cut by flying glass - Martinez, Port Chicago and
Pittsburg.
A special analysis was made of the different types of personal ,
property items submitted on damage claim sheets. for the inhabitants of the
City of Concord - 5.5 miles from the pier. Of a total of 347 caes with
an average claim of $16, the following types of damage and percentages of ,
the total cases were determined:
Percentage of
Item Damaged _ Total Cases
Drapes, curtains 34
Lamps, lamp shades 19
Tables, table tops _ 16
Dishes 14
Vases, figurines and pottery 13
Mirrors 12
Preserves 12
Furniture, other than tables 10
Glassware 6
Radios 4
Rugs 3
Pianos 3 '
Washing machines, refrigerators 2
The average personal property damage per-house-damaged was
estimated for various cities and towns in the vicinity of Port Chicago.
The results are shown on Exhibit No. 11 with a.. straight line drawn
through most of the points. The only point in the upper part of the line
which appears abnormal is the town of Clyde. As indicated before,
Clyde was shielded in part by -the western end of a hill whose elevation
is 25 to 250 feet above sea level.
The formula for the straight line was determined to be as ,
follows:
Log D = -..16d + 2.24 ,
58
E
i
Where "D" equals the average dollar damage per house of personal property
and "d" equals the distance from the pier in miles. In contrast, the
formula for the percentage of homes with seven or more panes of glass
broken was, Log Pg = .15d +2.015. For example, at five miles, it would
be interpreted from these formulas that 18 per cent of the houses would be
expected to have 7 or more panes of glass broken, 82 per cent of the
houses would be expected to have six or less panes of glass broken and the
average damage to furniture would be $27. Furthermore„the houses with
the greater number of panes of glass broken would have greater damage to
furniture by flying glass.
Similar to glass and door damage the percentage of personal
property damage to the total estimated number of total houses was plotted
on semi-log paper in relation to distance from the pier. The results are
shown on Exhibit No. 12. In contrast to all other graphs of damage, the
personal property damage to contents of houses in relation to estimated
total number of houses shows quite a variation between western and southern-
eastern cities. - On the basis of this graph it would suggest greater
' pressure on the south and east than on the west.
2. Merchandise
Merchandise in store windows was damaged up to fourteen miles
by the breakage of plate glass windows. _The damage claims indicate that
38 per cent were grocery stores , 13 per cent were clothing stores, 10
per cent were .furniture stores and 39 per cent were all other types of
stores. The decrease in average damage per claim with greater distance
from the pier is shown by the following table.
Place Distance from Pier Average Damage Der Claim
(Miles) (Dollars)
Port Chicago 1.1 587*
Concord 5.5 . 96
Martinez 6.7 105
Benecia 6.9 95
Pittsburg 8.0 76
Walnut Creek 11.1 61
Vallejo 12.6 57
Exhibit No. 13 shows the percentage of cases of merchandise
damage to the total number of cases of plate glass breakage plotted by
cities as to their distance from the pier. Although the points are
scattered they do suggest a straight line relationship. The line drawn
on the exhibit has a formula as follows:
Pm = -.08d + .2
* Includes compensation for "loss of business" and fixtures.
59
_ 1
VII I. .%PPENDIX
E-1 SU;•DIARY OF STRUCTURAL DAMAGE FROM PIER TO 70,000 FEET
AND
THE PARAMETER RV
E-2 SUMMARY OF DEATHS AND INJURIES FROM PIER TO 66,000 FEET
AND
THE PARAMETER RW 1/3
i M .
-� �on � s o or+ s � Ir, olnp ,� r•1 ,� .-� � v, M �oN .c .o .or` cc �-, M -, �
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
L
�i.
C
U1Ou1O N N CC O �/iO un0 U-) V-% � � V-� VnOOO Ln CC Vn
t!1 co N p r" L!'1 .•; %p r� M v s r� C N
".4 N N N JV-� to m 07 07 cl, p 1•1 N N N N N N N M M M
0: N M M M M P'1 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 'T 'T -7 '7 'T J J -7
O �
� � 3
a
o ol-+ i� ooc oMu, Mo .co •� -•I oM .; or- oclnu� o
r•+ v°) Ln In I"
I I I 1 9 x 11
to ^I 1 I I O C� W N N M N
G u t r-I .� •- to in to
U U to
0-4 0-4 �
a ,] O
C %+
a a r ,°. -4cLo v
a a c
F f- 'C b
W W tL'0 u
O t�0
Q A i7C O O
.-. U .O
_ ` C
O
•, W ~ < •I
cc
SK ca c
U SK L b
C C C d ¢ 7 00
W a w a c O w ca
E
4
QmQ • co
O O c0 O
L f11
' U1
v i
X X G
W W 6 xu
W rn
W d a�
' O fA CJ
b CJ to
C .Y 7
'O ((n V) C1 00-0 00 =
Q Q bc 3 "-I .n r1 , M to
E 4�. 4. w o0 00 .0 m E �+
G O O O C1 CI u u
+..I 00 u "I to Cla ,a O .O w 00
CJ a a L w •.•I U O Cl C) c0 CJ lw 00 00 7 r
-- L f0 00 to I•+ 00 rl "'O
7
+•+ F F J ' L+ Cl .-4 L W C I•+ W
u >+ Cl C7 > w O O CI O >,
.4 c L L 00 u w N w to = .a
to !n C C O 7 L C to (A (A O >>l�..G � L +�
L y y N y U V W CA ►+ L L.. L u L O CI O w �-•I L L U u CJ L. c0
!n Yr L. Ir L ra I--I IC S I tp cC R1 U7 U7
m m m m N t C E .Y L L CJ L y •C r ct3 .`. OJ Cl
a U O U U U M 1 I Cl +I O 1+ 1+ N w I C L Sr L
u U u u Ix• U ,. GJ O OJ i•i w u 60 C! CI Cl CJ 7 W s,+ u.. .... U
( r� N O N O C r4 M O O C C +� C G r 10 r �+ O :J
N t` r� s rc .•i Co N --I N p� O 0-I H Q O .•7 m W O m
7
•
i
.-t �c O+ N � � n Co C -� �c �c 00 c0 G� � CO CT •-i N s tr1 n 00
3
co 00 aOtirn01% all NNNNNN
N N N N N N N M M M (") m C•1 m C"1 h C•1 en m C.1 M r•9 (n
u
fs.
C dC000CVI, LnLnd Ln Ln d0 L106-1 CLnC
%n C T Ln O N N tic N to tt1 r\ r- C O •.T to r•, d N 'T N Citi
m IT .T IT Ln Ln 1n U-1 ti0 .o %.c �c r� 00 oc 00 00 C� O, Oti m O%
s �s � � sss a �a � ITssITIT17 esus
a
ro
-4 -4 LF) Q` CLr) 1.4rr Lr) .T -400 •-1
= N N -4 N M •-•A r, •-•� N N CV N 1.4 N r' ON rrt N -4
•rl.G A.i
p, v}
r
a a cn r^+
.0 u
a ra H ^
O u tt�
G7 Vi
to
1r
u
»
ct3
O
4 Cr
ci 00
0o to ro to oa ro ro 00 00
ro ro
E Ott1 0 —4 r-4y
00 .0 .0
^ 00 00 ai 00.0 ai O v o0 00 00 *4 00 d O O a u ai
Cr O 7 00 ro 00 00 ro ro O w -p 00•1-4 O — 00 00
Sr .•+ ,.i R •-+ d cz u O .y —4 4 w .-•4 t0 u •-+ u m v cc
a 3 ar .o u w m L = .0 O O .G s+ lC M i.+ y W
u O a O w O 00 O >r 4 0 0 0
U QS 77 u y ai u L+
7 ,Y .Y y .SC u y u w 0 -,a! yto
I•. u u u y ai u U M -I u
L f0 CJ N CO .1 LI lr L c0 u al R! L G U I.r u ro L
cn L L 3•+ l+ y S•+ L L 3-+ ( .0 L.+ 00 3-•
i•+ fw a w ,O 4l 3 al ►+ >•+ X u >~ ••• ai E �+•+ ro 4a O ai
O m a tz O C a} C O O ...t CO O sr C ro w r-a G O G
CO on H 0] C/1 co b CO 1.4
3
f� f� N m u1 w '-i m w :i rl %D n f� N
co C+ O O .1 N
1 3 c1 cn
a � I
(n cn 1
L
00 oou, �, cnper, 00 oar, o s oocnoo �n o
C 000 BONN N Of"DO Ln I*. V1 a0 OOf� OOf� O
•rl N M m %T %T fl f-I w C, .-1 N N N P1 cn f- fl- f- co O c0 O
Ln Ln N V1 V) ul u1 V1 Ln ,D ,D ,D ,D
_aI
O t!1 v1
O N �
ui
U
O A
1
E
p
�o
A en 00 00000 O COQ Ln O
O O O OOLn O O O 0-+ 0 W O O N
eq Ln L1 O Q\ Q -
N
^4 C, O \D 1 N N N C r•q
-4 m >, r-4
O L
a, w E 'v co L U ,Q)
a v m a) o .v O m L j=
'v Ln v o w e °' o °'
+a w c d 'n ` G
GE r�-c c'"10 -r-f .-I L .-i O - u 0. .m
A C - c0 m . F w 0J O C •14
i
O m C w c0 LV OJ 'C O u
C rr m w O c9 3 U L - m •'d
O w
co u 0 ° a u w w m u
F E E -� G
14 A L w G 7 cn -
C W 00 01 i-, w L O H w C p0
U m O i-+ - T - C w m A m w
C 01
01 u pa 'C C r� 'C +i O L+ ,� •O m J
w u at T .-I 'i .. m G m m c u m
O C. U .� U G 't7 m -4 N u O o0 U w 'C
' ~ •,q o w .4L64 cn c v u o c c c
to
C ca - ca o 'i u
c 0 L I �. ?� .-4 u u 7 A W m m +i w e E r1
A C n u r1. - ar .o w u O m m
O rA 'fl F d 7 7 N w 3
O "� 'C F A O 0J U C m U w a.+ - - w
F w w m m o w H L66
'fl m .] U O w 7 a.f -4 14 m O O m u p � m co w O C
a, Gp r-+ o C -4 " m o
> u O G. ,p 4+ L 0J cC U 7 f\ 'o t w "� m m w
c0 Ou � � O O E 3 7 w -7 44 u uam w i -0 meo w
d m - u w c0 c m w 0 0 0 m
c c W vs c9 G ca W O yr uc 1 m
0J O O N I A, m 'c7 O �L - E N w -nW u � m m
C v 4 •.4 \ W CU L w w W O w •.ti W 00 w 07 w m
r� L w .•1 U 00 `W 'C O ri W w W L U ` C "C O 00 w 7
N m O 'fl C O f0 m .a O u t .i vd 07 O A
O e0 w C OJ E-4eC m m m +1 00 e9 m C ` F O -,4 c0 c9 m L
0J c9 c9 7 > fn 'C G 0J 01 ` w 'o • 'p w
a o 0 1-+ m 0o w a O r+ u d o u o � u m w•° '� o
is w A a1 � w a. G= u d L � +i A m Gmd - o
. -I pp.•r 7 L L 01 00 w •a L - W c0 CO m w
O O C w U. 07 c0 O Co m c0 `-i a7 c9 v4 Gr w m C ca'7
> ri O to O +� w U O w l
c9 w 7 O w . >,t GO O m 01 M w L W m w L L
Z 0l C O W ,r �4 > 4.1 W W L c9 F+ sa > W -.i M W G..I L+ > m C
.Z w m O O w O O c0 O CO CL-2 m
a aJ C -lid w m O +i O w u 0 c0 E O O cn w u d w p, ro -
y+ 'o ,-I m w d 00 O - w O m o0 0o W - w a� E d 00 L u W - C 0.'v
7 m ` to 3 u aO u >, W - O w aJ m C 01 -+ -4 w
7 C 7 o o L O C W 7 o -W O O m, a 1
cn O -F4 -4 +J U U ti-4 O rl -1 U +•+ CC u o .-i 4J >>U O w U L L O y O +�
r-1 'v co 1-4 > L m - m w cos M E m 0.4 A. o U u u t >, ar 4
or -4 W w >,s c O ,i w o +� G c o >
.c m w o
,'o - o = cn v " y
►� �3 w � O m .i m O w O 3 0J Ln 7 � c0 rc L u1 W -4
0-4 F7 w G. co v m ch cc G. F > C4 cC �.] U U 0
.i f\ S J rl Q r N cc CO O 'T
..
-T to u't U-i Ln Ln Ln V F` .
a
s s �
L �-
rs
00 00 O 0CLMU-) cn cno0
C O O Ou'1 O cr% O r, r- r� r- Q .T
+1 O �o fV m %T r` CO cO u1 u1 %O
n t\ nn r� r` nnnn 00 OO
I I .•-a r i
C O C9 O V 1
CO 1-1 m H O
CN ,
� a a
in o 0 0 0 o
E m cn a s co s ca
co %O to C+ -4 .T
Aj C-4
L I
c0 C W W
p 4U .
fr r-1 •.� Z 61 eo Z a
u C 00 c O
U4 O C bo Nco .1.1
O
W >+ .� I +� G1 •I
v •� sr a.:; :.:�
u0.4o co" ..
CV GO F , .i C
C .^.
0-1 Q w .� ►r C:V < O
ri ++ U C W •C C _7
•'J 7'+ C7 q 7 C� E Z �
ca .� CL I U w u
c39 C W Q' W 4� F Q'
i G W I Cr
u ri F d = `
u aJ F co u �,* F F Z
LW p• E E OEv O =
sOi - O
w F 4A.4 a%
C E�
eo 0o O 0 w fr 0 m x
to 3 0 O a u W .
7 C V} Cn O CJ rA N I
u L+ co E O O F W 'a F "I
•O Cl c0 -4 O y >1 0 1 0 F
01 N CI .10 Qj•O 3 G 3 c w L 0.4
c .0 0 u C) N O 1Cc W C A
E O.
c9 d w cc O W U > u O
A I O >+ C)
•i-1 O • 6J O O CJ rl
01 N N w U > = r-+ O +' O 3 W
u c0 7 F C 1 `E--
:3
O 4 N - C7 E a to - -4 eo W u') N q
u O w ` N O >. rn N 1 W - C E
O O N w 1a CJ W I N I W c"1 va z
�+ o r+ a ai = o E x 1 •-1 d E >
o i ►-I d i d
rn .-1 rp --4 O cn 4 -4 U
c0 L+ .OJ O = - O ,� q c9 I O .4 7 1-4
CO 0J N •r l U a
C > .7 M O Cr N O C O Cw N
7 C1 O cn 3 >C ++ O X +r O
-4 co w Z
M
V9 C b n r\ r- o CO m C, -+ "0 M O CD C tf1
IZ 00 Q\ --I M r- O .-i O O O -4 N M M Ln %�o
•--1 -4 -4 rl N rl N N N N N rV N N N N N 0
�+ I
M
O�
r-1
O O Ln O O O O N O Ul O O H o Ul p N C O
O M N N Ln O ,O u'1 O lr1 'T O
N r1 Nw to O v: N 0 •-y O) O� C "C M N N
w t'•1
[rr M M -4 00 M CO D\ -4 M 17 Ln V'1 %D 00 C!, -T N %O
-4 N N I N N M M M M M M M M -T 'T 'T
C p
z rn
= N
d
C d
%C O C v1 IZ O C r`r o M In 0 C r` Cc v1 o O v1 0 C O
>••' O M t!1 .-i -T O C T N 0 N O C N V1 %0 O M C M I- C O N N M ,D
tC -T N .•-i O O .-•1 O M N O en M1 O O 0 00 Ul% M M .T .•i �p
.� N w w . w w w w w w w w w w
O N I'D Ln -4 N -4 r•1
Q -4 ,a
O .
U) O Ln
L
'•'r � 1a V>
U u a CD u
C W L G1 u N 0 w CJ W
C E O 8r LN c _ = 7 m O 4J w.O
' rt7 O w .-1 L+ $W w w u W>00
w Loi G
N y y 0. 7 L L 4l w CJ W d
C 1 '9 w 'C u In wy w mu E 7 1 u 0
G O Cl 0 w u w u O v w w
o m . w to co v w .a E o I .tn E oo v .G
F w m w W M w C 0 >+ w Cl ww 4J L tp cC
to O L+ N N y Q. •1 0 w w to . U 'C W 4l
c w c to a to c bo w Mcn c a to v . co •o v
w o w Oc cC -4O w m 0 W w m co u c w y -o cC cn
a e m u = -, ►+ .-1 .q C u E 7 .0 "4 = 0w u M+ " y �, v to
.6+ to'O to W w -4 0 v 7 O 0 w L rn -4 cn w .1 -.4 Cy .•r L. 7
' O o to = n. O to w o u L� 'v v 0 v W 'v o a w m ,, w co rn a W
w L L ME m U W L rn CL U w u -4 rC w •O .-1 W L+ w y w
1-4 E 'c .. w to rn d o ct7 L+ c 0 m -4 to a v ►. tv c W
cC $. .-i w O cC Oo O r1 w -Y = w S. .-i c L+ O yr w O y w
¢ 00 1 0 00'o O m 0 0 E a m x •-+ cn u 0 c O •.•+ 1 p, u M d o
c0 .-4 u r0 t w O w cC E L+ o w O = L u -4 -4 C 0. N O M
I E tC w E -4 u 7 >+ 'C O w O u >w w w W u w rn -4y !+ 7 to w
r0 $W c w m mL t U1 > 41 o 'C co 7 w C CL m yw W w rn 7 'C
�a 'n c to o 'v w 1 u 1 a1 co I c c W 1 w o C6 0 3 w 0 y L I w
d ci +J -4 O 7 a 0 OO 1 w rn w O L
Ckc ►• 4 -4 u 0. W •-a w W W W M � 00%0 E N rn W 0 >-d w to w $-d m w C w -4 rL
r0 d rC t0 7 w u to L " -4 w • rn tC 1 7 +a w to
E w w rn w w -4 t 7 'v O O d Lo v E 3 1 1 L+ O O 1 0 -1 M +' 1 O R1 r .m o
O L+
r0 w O 7 w m w -4 > > > to 0 t0 w > C O mw to � 0 r0 L+
N rn O
' A C w w rA ,u rn w w .0 0 W W r0 'C 7 'C 07 0 W w = w $+ w W w w
'•y U 4 -.L M C d w r1 0 N Cl y I 01 1 rA u l N of >' G w
w N O) 7 u E C of >, -, rn rn L OJ 7 to 7 rn 7 w E 1 I I w w
0 CC OO L OD tL m to O w Cl w N 00 0 7 0 w w O wL 1 1 1 U w L X O
O u tC L w mC 'C •-t Lw w w w w m .J= O .0 O b tU r Oo w u I I 1 co u E ^' L'
C7 tC L to La U L+ v C W rA G w L+ w L of O N O1 cC w L+ I 1 I U L+ L+ Cl w W
rL Cl .-a d 7 w -4 -4 7 cC r0 w L >+ L1-4 7 L+ Lr N 7 I I I y 7 y +j
> > ••r > tC O rl 4 w > .t N t0 U -4 O tC
4C4 bo
O
ro
Z � �
d G t0
•-� w y y �
to G O L+ sr
w >
o ra p. dF to •v to to v to o co w o
•r{ L+ rl +4 C rt w 4 L L
U L
U
'O ,.� U0 w U
u u "-4l U y
�' .-i y W U w W O) w Q) x rL w C
Ct. d Cn L] W U c0 nq CA �. W On O
6
r•I 1l1 N IT P'f 1.f1 O N %D Q
I O 10 N e, Q N N e•9 en en V)
3 cn en en en cin .T IT .T .T
C
L
W
G+ 0 O 000 O
G lD N 0 ID -. M uY O ND 110 O
+i 17 U'1 n e� %D 00 ri Q N N e�
�D 1 O+ IO 00 1 1
�T d 17 V1 ell
-U
O G1
O
-i
L
.-1
a a -
ca E '
� a �
C o cC •,-I
u c 3
O C N
W
O y •p aJ C
O L C rl L c0
L 7
u 1+ O L cz N
1.64 6j
O al y •a O aJ
C '
u vl C r-I G Y al
s+ rn a� ca c0 o E
G >•+ C � m
++ C w '
I al O � >,+ 7
C i -r4 $1
to cu
�C -Y ts0 O u 0.
C O ++ —4 w a/ G
cc tr c0 L m >+ w
O o
a) I m y •-� w u -4 -4 i.
c0
CLO c0 e0 O eD C C
t0 u O . I 1+ L rl rb L+ f.� >•+ .
7 C C aJ L+
C O m a! u u. O u u u a S
u — y Y+ y U U -M o O
W (n a ; al > > 7 u ar 7
0 3 0 W w m
0 0 L L N w C o 41 L O
QJ +a
W .= u a1 y y c0 O m x cn m a) u
O u E
N cm0 O O w o 0 c
co ZZ3
c
O
lie
w w
a7cc
u
L M c0 1-1 aJ u
en W. u
O m a L „ rl L o
U .0 7
a to "7 U C O 10 al T 4
tti F+ u y O .-c u y.. —4w .� >
O +� c9 >+ e0 C O e0 c9 eC 7
0. Q+ G. .a U 3 6 U CG .] 9 c/1
7
i
I
_ � �
N N N .S -7 -,7
CO q CC q CO CO q N N N N N
U
C W
ro o
3.i J
"p L w
aci ca o c oc000ccoc oc o c o
x U -• . c o oLnunLnLntin cc o 0000 0 0 0
O + Q N N N N N co co 00 N N N N N
1r E L+ •--� .-1 n -4 .-i .-i .-r -•ti N N N m fn
a a v
d w a,
m v
�.
cmU u
O m U O
0
0 a it a 00 a
o u v .•� W m
ro m s u • �. 4+ +-i
�p w
� � a a •--t m -.+ u
C U
p
H u 1+ C O a a O o a a v
u m m C C N O a U ++
06d m i "O ro M C I fr O u w d
•
m a a N a C m a+ m ro u ro w w
� c u a m ro
O O U ro m O
u .� u C s+ a0fl u
m .+ ro m -4 E
.a ►� C m O C ro C 1 a w O
W r-t ch O O O 'O .0 O ` a ro 6+
cry r u -.7 a U IV x m u m m m U 7 w +.+
m u -a a C a a a ro C O O
O '-i ►-� 7 +1 C m a a C 'C 7' -+ +ti ,i w -�4
10 a C •v .C. -o >r -0 9 O C C a C .
a a W C C a U C c a C c a «-, -n-- o Ln •a
x .. a ro x u a o m O s c C C -+
u to .14 c u � w Y+ m m ij m
z z su acv a >J u u C. os c a u
a o m
c a c c c u a a s. c c c o a o c o v a
1+ U OaG NU C.5auO :�L z ZUtAQts7wC5
t!1 '•'1
ro
44
�, N -C a U
= = _ M
m ^C ca C C
^, = _ .i a a
Cs m "O O
0 OUd
C U a tCC `Gu d
' to
10
N O m S -4
-14
ro a 0 w a o H u
u -H .c
a m u ,� ^v m a m
Cr- O _ a a O
' O O _ ad = _ _ = H = caG = U _
a 0 a a a a w C
c m T >, s. x -,4 -4w0 0 u x c
c w r4 ami cca u ro a
m o tin u 3 a
L a a X00 tt1 m ro a N O ,+ u
�. O
u ro ro w a C y-n C C N
U m +1 a ++ G a ro 1. a w m Rgf
sw
� ,�, +c «�-� v O E ++ cEi 3 cas '� c 3 3 u
1.+ C > ►+ > 1.4 -4 ro OE a _ y a
tl1U U E U U P. V5 �„"" �T' U aL roxU U O .o
u
C w
ca O
L L
Q L W yJ I C O O O C C ^v O O
• a) C O C �l1 O O ^_ C O d
O -••� S 1!1 to u1 eft U'1 V1
L E L =
G O a)
eb m •v en ..
v a0 cc c -C •v m Q ❑
U U) C C L O a) O N U) w •O +•+ +•+ a) .
W .4 O >, - a1 a) E 'C 00 7 3 7 a) O C a) U
Q) 00 z -+ = C (n a) 0) ctin J e0 C r-c
G C 7 ++ C )•+ w C u M r- C O y E CL'
O -4 7 O cli • 4 7 y y+ O
y d 3 V) e0 a) —I .i > u O CU +�
L U1 00 w I., >, C 00- O LF) c0 1-4 G m
v u w c = u aJ Q) .� .c ea u z s >
a) +-+ O r; •.-� 8 a) w Y E L a) 'C C v1
L U) c0 C a) m Sa u . L u C
U) U) 'A U) W a) M I > C 3 W w L a1 c0 rl L cn r•r
aJ C +4 N z C O O a) O O 64 7 U) C
*� E O E > o L *i I "o "a G u w aJ u a co - .j
Q C L V1 cC >, O L L L C+ W ❑ >, e0 C 00 O
L •-�W 3 10 c0 a) L O a) 7 P1 L •••I U1 00 C Y ea
7 G O a) G a) •r 7 C u C +e cc > '
++ 00-C 1. S■ C U) W "C O w C L O O C O N U) L O L ❑
C C C 7 ea a) O m )-a +4 7 -4 a) --1 •'•4 al u Lr]
a w ...e •.a 'C L >+ L G C O .'O Li •4 M a+ �-.w L 'O u
O L O 1.4 L a) .1I U L c4 C w O E 7 C >, 7
•--4 •L •.� _L •t7 C C) O_cc L C •r+ •.� ►+ O ►+ U c0 w U ❑ C
++ 7 E 7 N U C. a1 CA (n L 7 7 w G a) N t9 7
cn to O •r- 3 N c0 O E Y+ O rn m U U) +-) (n a) 00 •-� a)
O a) L C a) a >+ O cC 7 F cC C 8 7 0 O " O O w >, U C T.
W w .+ w w 3 en .: u •.• 3 • 4 C U) .4 > cc O
O
F
uj
U G O O O
Q L 00 00 CC1GLy
+� w C c0 c9
u Q Q u u
.4
O C L u 0 u Lc7
L = L L L
w m L = _ _ _ M
y O -v O W
aJ
C ra
� N C ❑
> 00 C
m cc sr C
L
Z C •H •.1 C C rl
mO O aEi a a vQ) F
,i ►+ 1 Y Y Y Y
G a) aJ eC 3.+ ►+ c0 c0 Z
O 00-,4C C L U) O O L 0 a) 6
--c O u O 3 G 3 u'o o 0.4
•.a cn y _• O +rC O CC
+r y ca -. c x C L x ro
U Or G. LL' U CG O Ix N x I: u
2
' V,
I+ •--4 N e'1 d J V1 1!'1 %G CN O� t`
T Ln V1 n CO cc CO
Cr
iC w
e9 O
L L
r m ►. a
0 o C c o CCC o 0 0 0 o C C o C c
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C S C C C
• GJ IT V1 V) V) e� e� e- b CT C -T V1 00 00 .0 N N N
X U
O e^ en
sr E 6,
G O C1 1+
G W --i O +J
¢ W G O C
r-I O
'
to u C w
aG O w eo t•+ 00 3 O -ra O ++ m
U C O 41 O W O L Cl 4l ++ --v C u
e0 T L w r--1 0O > G 4J O1 -- >
ID C CJ 'O I OJ O I ^� G Cl w m
'a Y •O = m a O m u c >, ^+ O O m Cn E W C v
C 0 .+ w e w G1 co 'v M ^ $4 - O U L+ w 00
K >r L m O m GJ b GJ 7 C E to ^ m O Z Ol e0 to C
a d - u t+ O "+ b u L N co -v •.] L' 1 I L .
s. •--i -4 3 = L L L ►+ dl L r--1 C 'v. m 7 `4 G7
7 r-4 o C >+ eti C >d w e9 O ,i u > w
C W U eo M M O 41 L 1-1 C m C�-Y. 3 u � u L lC
C 664
CJ L O C 7 w U y U 4J G1 4J t - 'v ^i W L
c
�-+ u m o, m u -M -• m u m m 0 m u W •a G C v c c a O C
'v to d m C C 0 m W w d C 0O m .Y W a 0 Ir d
w -v 41 U m m m •.a u GJ 'v w i.r 0 .Y C w o 0 c 'v O w L o F < 'v ^ o m E
Gl O C >+ •-•1 C -- ,� C ••-4 w �L 07 -4 L r. cc W m w -.+ GJ
C L C .0. O w m w w - N C-0J -W w C C m Ir N C „a CO Z m m ?
0 7 0 .-4 00 W > C C o C C 0 0 0 C W C 7 m C O ¢ : G- >, C C >, O
+j - m C u v M o L O w O m 0 +j v 0 L = � O s• 0 0 --1 E
En u m W q -r-i 00 E ^ m E U m m m ya u u m Aj z -4 O m
L to L m 1-+ w C L w L 00 +-+ 1w u lJ iJ " " C L m m L L w ►-+ .-I 'v
7 L
= O .M -i C W 7 ++ 7 J m v 7 = -+ C W -C C 7 W O c 7 7 c0 C
v w u C r en w v av I• v G� u � U L; U W ¢ v � L o v vi v � a M
F
0 1
m o
"
•+ F m
U C ^ _
C L u
O L "4
,-i O = _ _ _ _ _ _ = - = = = Z
++ Cir F
DC w
u
u w W O
0 0 I 3
F
F
E � O
00 C o cu 00 O C OCi
C C O) O C O W L
01 -4 >+ 61 u 41 "4 G) - y
> u 'ti E •v E > E 'v v E d •v �.j b
-4 41 4J O +4 CJ O +4 O CJ E O ¢ J Cl
u -4 -.4 'v L L Y L L r-+ L .0 O 'v .0 F -0 .G
Y C -)& 4)
-4 rl rl +I +i -i-1 -M C -r. - H
+C1
CE >+ C E E E EES E E L C 6 -] is E E
co o ., 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m 0 0 0 0
� 3 C7 3 3 .y 333 3304 = 3 3 33
' 3
00 co co co cc r� r-
cT M M 17 -7 r\ t\ f`. t\ t\ f` t� ••7 M
N N N N N CJ N N N N N M �7
Q)
U
C w
ro a
41 L
a v
w
c o0 o c co co C) c ao o'c c c
• aJ C O O C O t, n M Cl) 7 -T O M
X U •"a - •S O O O M M �T -7 N N N N N N N 00 17
a cL « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « «
w E w = c- C tS+ 0 1 ll IC tip N N N N N N N N �p
C. O Q -4 N N N M M M Cl) I7 -7 vi �C
C. w •-t
N ro as i
a, u E m a) ro o 'v W 0 u
m > m a w u c .0 -a W C a ro
T a� a} •r+ m ^+ .0 to w E •v. c O w --4 aJ w
C) T co c C ro m c w >+ G O - c +j
w c u w w —+ c aro in . O w e to •O
r
4-4 a w -o (U w w a - •-+ 0 0 0 x W
++ 3 w «"O -+ C > a "tl u aJ C m T +i .
O O mV-4 x ro a) LW C « m U C Gi m ++ u
a C m •-+ O M al •-i ro m U m 7 "O ca '
•-+ T �+ w C w O U c C. m
W 1 w (U aml 1 ro C G aJ 3 N - O -+ ro E w
-4 L
c u m a. o T1 ►+ •v a c m m « aJ ro
ro -•+ m "O 0 O c0 m -4 w 'v }"t C w w ^c m m 4t U W « u
aJ a ro --4 W c 7 w C N GJ > C N m O >, C O L m
w w > > m ro v E 3 .� u w u0 .+ u --
C .* 4 CUm
O c a c w 0 ro a O as 00 •v c •-+ c
>,r E o « c oo la a aD >+ u aJ " "q c O w
in
c CU W — -a c w •-•r > + C a -.-� W C 0 ro -4 3 a
�
..� m 'v w u m T4 w o c a •-c ro m -� .-a " W u &j •o
�+ c c ro w c u C c .a u " oo Ccr+ C C. c m w cc
++ O m m W .= O U +� O ro m u - w ro 0 -+ ro w w w w e
a m w w W C. w w .c +.+ E as w w x 3
m L u m u w w w ro i u ro w 4+ as m > w w u > u O O
a > > -4 m o a w w > > - W w w u w >, C a m a ro w •-+
J U oD.: W u CO 4. U U C. G:1 ro a m CJS U U <. C.-3
00
N w L
sem. aJ + .o y
O M U m a3
C u U -i
O c 0 --4
c > a ro d -+ w ro ,
ca >
iJ w w t+•,F w W w W .
m a s a o a 0 a
u
O c C: T T T
.� 3 3
00 U U U u L
U U
E
C E O C C -oC al
E
ar O w ay ,-+ b
0 0 C r r O y r r m +1
b
U w to a} U U•C E > •fl 'L O c E u u aJ u
x u ay 0 •-•f --+ 0 •-� ,, "v a
W c a r r-4 E 77 r r �t a > 0
o a - m
3 w .c c r c`c as-4 •� u -4 � � C o
r.ro c c C C _4 C -c+ C G C C +1 c C c ° c
ro m ro ro E ro _�z ce CO M m w m m ro r+
c E E E E o c E w E E E E o C E E E w E ro
w o a o a s ro a a 0 0 0 0 0 ro 0 o a 0 u
,r. .`.. 3 3 3 w „�, 3 3 3 3 3 3 •c ,�., 3 3 3 C.9 3 m
�. 00 cn u'1 v'1 Le) Lr) v1 Lr) ul r-t tin —4 tin u'ti in in Lr#A
M r
3: C•1 M P1 t"'1 f'1 en c•"1 M en •.T -Z -T-T
a
u
C w
m O
L 4rl
••: a a
Q 4.3w 0 c coc c 00 c c c 0 O occc4?
c 0 o coo c 0 o 0 Ln CD cCC ^c
' a c %0 h h h h h 0 0 0 «i .-i N rn rt e't rl r,)r*l
0 u •ei z to 4n U1 Ln M1 to %0 �D �D %D %0
w E i•.
a o a
a s� ••+ m a
d w a C '0 4J m m
�+ o a s a 4C +1 C 0 N a m rD O w
a L aL O >, • w C m a m m c
C m u .0 N u O '-i
m -Y. m CD w a u a w •0 s 0
E a > A a s•+ a s >, a m a w " u "-+ m u 3
IW u O a m r-+ a -nAj 'o a s m u L w m w 0
a a .0 «ry s a E .0 C -14 m m m s+ a s
a r-i 00 m '0 C u m O 0 u O '0 m '0 u w C 00
c 44 a *1 c m C c m a a s 0. -+ a
a Co Aj a 00 • 00 m .-; m a u " .1 0 'v C
a w m a ,C 10 O a a C c a a «i tV m m c 0 'v
a s a a m m s to .0 ac r., .- m a m .-i m m Z C
a 0 ,a a m u E •-� a 4+ a 00 >,-H t w S. M C m m
"0 a 0 ,1 a u c c s u i+ '0 '0 .1 E to +-+ C a > .0 O C
Sr w w •0 a C -p w U c m Co w 43 W m •••+ w w $4
a a ++ a w ,., c .4+ 0 •�4 w 3 7 r-+ 0 0 m O c w a m rd m
s *v- m ,x m -s O •v u >, c E m w � 3 a 'a a r
C m M '0 C C t1 ,1 m a U m O .0 m •41..0 O 1-4 ta0 W-0
r+ G -rt a M O c >, ,#! a 0 a w C m W a.10 .0 t6 .0 , it a m
O tq. 10 >,.0 O a AJ .0 w '0 m .Y O i O O a >, C •-+ C. >,ri
i4 w as ,-+ " a .rO w u w a u .C C' C w m .5t 4a -,4 m m C C c
M O u u u C a O m 0 •0 0 O a u -M C u m c' C to C m C m O O O C
tw m m O s•+ w +-+ $4 1 -Y. c O a 64 a O a O O 1+ m O
r a tow N a - C N a to 7 O to to U a a " C a •C -4 L a 4l to m 0 .
(l u m m a a 4+ •*-,4 y
1 a to O c , u so a E > to u m u. u- A, c yu u u u u u
m a w -4 a >, a c 7 m o s •P+ a .w. m a C a w = 0 c a a s v v
0ukm at„� +-+ c� � ..: m Ec.� v � G M oo 0 .3 u acs u .a cuUc� c�
a
tao
m
u
L
C
O u
•.4 Sr
&J
a° o
to S
H
.0
u
E a.
0 0
w e o u aci o0 oa al
� M 00 C'wv 3 E a E u N u a '1 'c'
*+ " a a c a ;j1 0 c O , 0 - •>
E -r-I
c 3•r r-i C �: c - s C C C C C C C C C i1.
CID
rl C �-I ri -' C '''i O rl ri M •e•1 rl M •ei
m Mi m rr m m m m m m m m m m
E c c 6 C E E Cm E so E E E E E E c
ate+ ma ma a m a Os O a a 000 m
3 '0 X33 3 s: 3 3 3H 3 3 3 333