Since 1990, FOCUS has been working on the cleanup of the Annex and considering its future use. For more information, see Who is FOCUS?.
A slightly different version of this information appeared in the "Sudbury Crier" this summer.
Page Contents
Considerations for
Reuse
Recent Proposals for Reuse
The Land Transfer or "Excessing"
Process
Loopholes in the Rule
History of South Annex in Sudbury
Additional Information on the Annex
One very significant point has been raised in all communities: how safe will the Annex be for future occupancy by people? The answer to this question appears to depend on which "authority" or agency is consulted and what their interest is in the future reuse of the land. One important opinion to consider is the Army's opinion, via their technical consultants:
"Use of the site in its current condition appears unlikely to pose health risks. Future use that would result in similar or lower potential exposure than indicated under the current use scenario (such as use for park land) also appears unlikely to pose a significant risk. Future use involving resident use of the RI areas and certain other areas of the installation would pose elevated risks assuming the exposure parameters and toxicity criteria used are accurate for the individuals exposed. However, such use is considered to be unlikely."
This statement can be found in the "July 1993 Draft Final Remedial / Site Investigation Report", available in the Sudbury Public Library.
In 1992, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (F&W) conducted a study of the northern portion of the Annex to consider it for inclusion as a wildlife refuge after Army clean up. F&W determined that the majority of the acreage north of Hudson Road was suitable as refuge land based upon the existence of threatened and endangered species and extensive wetlands.
The Selectmen in Stow, Maynard, and Hudson originally supported this proposal. In late 1993 and 1994, Stow and Maynard Selectmen began discussing "redevelopment" of the Annex after clean up. Proposals for reuse included: a shopping mall, a landfill, a septic treatment facility, and residential housing. Citizens in both communities were extremely concerned and submitted a citizens' petition for town meeting consideration.
In recent news articles the "excessing process" has been inaccurately portrayed. "Excessing" is government-speak for transfer of property from a federal agency when that agency no longer has a use for the property. The process, while filled with numerous bureaucratic twists and turns, is fairly simple. The process has been the same for years and is very unlikely to change.
Before any land transfer can take place, the Annex must be released by EPA. This will not happen until the site is deemed as "clean" or until a final clean up plan is approved by EPA. When this happens, several years from now, the process of offering the land to different agencies begins. The pecking order for "who gets the land" is as follows:
If the state or town presents a plan that would qualify under the McKinney Act (housing for the homeless) through Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the state or town agency can get an exception to the pecking order. In 1989, the Sudbury Housing Authority was almost successful in acquiring the southern portion of the Annex to construct subsidized housing by using this loophole. A history follows:
In the late 1980s, Sudbury had developed a plan that would take advantage of the excessing loophole by submitting a plan to build housing for the homeless, along with an open space proposal for the rest of the land. Sudbury cited a community need for subsidized housing as a primary reason to proceed quickly. If this plan had worked, it would have ensured transfer of the Annex in such a way as to avoid the possibility of the Annex being acquired by an undesirable agency.
While Fort Devens believed the land was "clean" and had declared it as "excess", other government agencies were conducting environmental investigations at the Annex and were not communicating with the Town or Fort Devens. The following events occurred:
You may find additional information at the Public Libraries of each community where the Army is required to maintain a complete library of Annex documents. The best Army document for a general history of the site and environmental investigations is the Master Environmental Plan, also available at the libraries.
FOCUS also will attempt to answer questions or direct you to the best source of information. You may Email FOCUS or use this reply form.
We look forward to hearing from you!
Top of page 
Comments
Return to FOCUS Site Index
© 1995 FOCUS Webscaped C. S. Ruzich Graphics