From: | Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org> |
Date: | 16 Jul 2005 09:58:01 -0000 |
Reply: | cpeo-irf |
Subject: | [CPEO-IRF] Skaggs Island (CA) |
Skaggs Island is a non-BRAC Navy closure in the San Francisco Bay Area. The last paragraph in the excerpt below confuses me. I am unaware of any federal law that would require the Fish and Wildlife Service, or any other federal agency, to assume the Navy's cleanup liability if it accepts the property. I would like to hear from someone who knows of such a statute. Rather, federal agencies are supposed to address environmental liability in an agreement that they negotiate at the time of transfer. the Service and other Interior Department agencies have a policy against accepting contaminated excess Defense property under the terms offered by the military services - unless, of course, Congress requires them to. The only legal difference between a transfer to Fish and Wildlife and a transfer to the state, that I can think of, is that the Navy and the regulatory agencies must find the property suitable for transfer or for early transfer before turning it over to a non-federal entity such as California Fish and Game, and there is no such requirement for intra-federal transfers. LS *** Skaggs Island puzzle fitting together By Emily Setzer Sonoma Index-Tribune (CA) July 15, 2005 For tidal restoration around the North Bay, the addition of Skaggs Island to the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge is the final piece to the puzzling legalities regarding the transfer of the land to a federal or state agency. "A lot of groups in the Bay Area want to see this land protected, and we're slowly finding the appropriate agency to manage it and work through the legal issues," said Christy Smith, manager of the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge. The Navy currently owns the 4,400-acre island, which contains an abandoned Navy communications station and an 1,100-acre hay farm leased to the Haire family. The inclusion of the island would increase the refuge's size from 13,190 to 16,490 acres. The original plan called for the Navy to transfer the land to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which manages the bordering San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge. However, the Navy insisted that if the land were transferred to another federal agency, such as the Wildlife Service, federal laws would require the service to be responsible for any future discovery of contaminants or necessary environmental cleanup. ... For the entire article, see http://www.sonomanews.com/articles/2005/07/15/news/top_stories/news04.txt -- Lenny Siegel Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 Fax: 650/961-8918 <lsiegel@cpeo.org> http://www.cpeo.org _______________________________________________ Installation_Reuse_Forum mailing list Installation_Reuse_Forum@list.cpeo.org http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/installation_reuse_forum |
Follow-Ups
|
Prev by Date: [CPEO-IRF] Arsenic at/near former Ft. Devens (MA) Next by Date: [CPEO-IRF] Moffett Field (CA) blimp hangar future heats up | |
Prev by Thread: Re: [CPEO-IRF] Arsenic at/near former Ft. Devens (MA) Next by Thread: Re: [CPEO-IRF] Skaggs Island (CA) |