By Jonathan Farrell

As construction continues at 2550 Irving St., questions and demands remain about the cleanup and City and state response to the toxic plume.

As reported in the June issue of the Sunset Beacon, the new affordable housing project site apparently sits upon a toxic plume of perchloroethylene/tetrachloroethylene gas (PCE.) The chlorinated solvent was allegedly released into the earth from former dry cleaners which once operated near that location, as they used the substance in their cleaning process.

In December of last year, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) banned the use of PCE. Exposure to the gas is known to cause cancer and is linked to neurological diseases, such as Parkinson’s, according to the Centers for Disease Control.

VIMS Solution

City and California state officials claim the toxic residue at the 2550 Irving St. construction site has been mitigated via the implementation of a protective barrier between the soil and construction site. It is referred to as a vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS).

The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) claimed due diligence has and is being followed in the PCE containment effort.

Russ Edmondson, the DTSC media information officer, stated that the VIMS, “will protect future building occupants from vapors off-gassing from subsurface contamination.”

The VIMS was completed on Nov. 15, 2024, and “DTSC was present onsite to observe smoke testing of the vapor barrier,” Edmonson stated.

To ensure future functionality, Edmonson said, “The remedy also requires an operation and maintenance plan to ensure continued effectiveness and a land-use covenant prohibiting residential use of the property without the VIMS.”

Containment vs. Cleanup

A Mid-Sunset Neighborhood Association (MSNA) Response Plan document suggested using a soil vapor extraction (SVE) method to remedy the site as opposed to a VIMS solution. Using the SVE process, toxic substances are essentially vacuumed out of the soil, as opposed to being contained by being covered up and sealed in the earth employed by the VIMS method.

“In the Response Plan (MSNA found) that … an (SVE) remedy was the highest ranked and most cost-effective response that is protective of both future building occupants and the existing residents,” said Donald Moore, an expert in PCE cleanups and a professional geologist licensed by the State of California.

“(VIMS) is not going to make the PCE go away,” he said.

Alysa Pakkidis, a DTSC information officer, stated that the VIMS plan was approved because they deemed that it best protects human health. They solicited community input in 2021 before choosing to move forward with the VIMS plan.

“Soil vapor extraction (SVE) is not warranted at 2550 Irving Street given the diffuse contamination in soil vapor on site,” Pakkidis claimed.

Scope of Containment Effort

Many Sunset District residents are insisting on accountability and follow-through in the mitigation of the toxic plume. Thus far, the VIMS has been applied to just the 2550 Irving St. property, despite the entire block of Irving Street between 26th and 27th avenues being impacted by the toxic residue.

The MSNA is advocating for the DTSC to address the toxic plume throughout the Irving Street corridor, not just at the site of the new housing project.

“That PCE vapor is part of a larger plume that is underneath more properties,” said Paul Holzman, a MSNA member speaking on behalf of the organization.

“The whole plume needs to be cleaned up – not just a single property,” he said.

Edmondson noted that the DTSC is expanding its research into other properties on Irving Street.

“DTSC is overseeing ongoing investigations of PCE at two other sites in the neighborhood. These sites are the former Albrite Cleaners and 1300 26th Ave.,” Edmondson stated.

Allegations of DTSC Malfeasance

Moore alleged the DTSC compromised procedures in order to expedite the 2550 Irving St. containment.

“The DTSC approved reports and made decisions about the final remedy prematurely under their legal agreements with the SF Police Credit Union (SF PCU) – which owned the site – and the Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation (TNDC) without an adequate source investigation. They never sampled at the location of former Miracle Cleaners,” Moore alleged.

Pakkidis denied this claim and stated that “a supplemental source investigation was conducted in 2023 at 2550 Irving Street in response to community concerns.”

DTSC conducted a membrane interface probe (MIP) investigation at the former Miracle Cleaners and found that “no significant signal of PCE was detected in any of the MIP borings,” Pakkidis stated.

Edmondson added, “Although a dry cleaner (former Miracle Cleaner) was present on the site between 1928 and 1949, no concentrated source of PCE has been found on the site.”

While DTSC found “no records of PCE use at 2550 Irving Street,” they did find “records of PCE use at the former Albrite Cleaners site across Irving Street,” Pakkidis stated.

This PCE at 2550 Irving St. could be “related to an offsite source,” Edmondson said.

Long-term PCE Exposure

Moore also noted that the DTSC has yet to implement a response plan for residents who “have been breathing in PCE above the DTSC’s health-based screening level for decades.

“The DTSC doesn’t seem to care about these residents and has tried to discount this exposure,” Moore alleged.

In response to this claim, Pakkidis stated that the DTSC is conducting an “investigation of potential PCE sources near 2550 Irving Street.”

DTSC has issued an Imminent and Substantial Endangerment Order to the parties who have been found to have released PCE (currently including the former Albrite Cleaners). They will be “overseeing the additional investigation, and if necessary, remediation, required for that site,” depending on what their investigation finds, Pakkidis said.

As for the 2500 Irving St. property, “DTSC also expects to oversee site investigation and, if necessary, remediation of the Police Credit Union property adjacent to the former Albrite Cleaners site if redevelopment proceeds.”

Moving Forward

Holzman from MSNA said the organization wants the DTSC to “clean it up before you build it up.”

DTSC said it will continue its investigation of PCE contamination.

Pakkidis stated the San Francisco Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Branch, Contaminated Site Assessment and Mitigation Program will not sign or approve any building permits until DTSC is satisfied with the level of containment.