May 18, 2011


The NAVSTA Newport Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) gathered at the Officers’ Club for their bimonthly meeting on Wednesday, May 18, 2011. The meeting started at 6:00 p.m.

See enclosure (1) for the attendance list.
See enclosure (2) for the agenda.

David Dorocz, the Navy Co-Chair, opened the meeting and welcomed the group.


D. Dorocz stated that he had not received any comments on the previous meeting minutes. The March 16, 2011 minutes were approved.

PRESENTATION: Results of the Coddington Cove Rubble Fill Area Study Area Screening Evaluation (SASE) Investigation

Tom Campbell (Tetra Tech) presented a summary of the Navy’s Study Area Screening Evaluation (SASE) at Coddington Cove Rubble Fill Area (CCRF). A Preliminary Assessment (PA) was completed in 2004 and the recent SASE investigation was the next step in site investigation. Work included soil, groundwater, sediment, and surface water sampling as well as digging test pits. The analytical results were compared to the EPA Regional Screening Levels (RSL) and RIDEM Direct Exposure Criteria (DEC). A human health and ecological risk assessment screening evaluation was performed. Elevated concentrations of PAHs and metals were found, likely due to the presence of fill as well as road runoff and storm drainage from the urban surroundings. There is minimal concern for risk to human health and the environment. The site is enclosed on all sides and there is little potential for contamination to migrate offsite. In addition, the site is a partial wetland and cannot be used for residential purposes. Based on the current and potential future land use at the site, the presence of other contaminant inputs, and the limited risk posed by the contaminants found, the Navy recommends No Further Action (NFA) at this site. The presentation is provided as enclosure (3).

David Brown asked why the EPA RSL values were so different than the RIDEM DEC values. Steve Parker (Tetra Tech) responded that the values have different origins and are used for different purposes. The EPA RSL values are screening values (concentrations at which effects may occur) and are very conservative. DEC values are regulatory criteria and have been determined to be protective, but are balanced by concentrations we expect to see from background conditions.

Claudette Weisinger asked if the risk is calculated based on the EPA standards. S. Parker responded that under CERCLA the EPA values are used to calculate risk, but that the state criteria is also considered to make sure that the site is cleaned up to both EPA and state standards.

David Brown asked whether the contamination was from runoff or from the Navy. T. Campbell responded that the contamination is likely due to both sources.

Kathy Abbass asked what kind of ceramics had been found. T. Campbell responded that there were various kinds of ceramics, such as tile, but that it did not appear historical. Kathy requested that if the Navy discovers any historical debris in their work that this be brought to her attention.

D. Dorocz asked what the maximum concentration of Aroclor 1260 was detected in surface soil. S. Parker stated that the concentration was 0.5 ppm at SB-05.

Kathy Abbass asked what would generate manganese at the site? S. Parker stated that manganese is naturally present in soil along with other metals such as iron, and in soils where there is less oxygen, such as a wetland, natural chemistry can make manganese concentrate in the soil. Manganese is commonly found in fill areas.

David Brown asked what the plant cover would be like if the site is left alone. T. Campbell responded that the site already has large established trees, dense areas of shrub, and grassy areas. The wetland is dominated by phragmites.

Claudette Weisinger asked what the EPA and RIDEM think about No Further Action at the site. T. Campbell responded that this is a draft report and the regulators have not yet provided comments.

David Brown asked if the site is tidally influenced. T. Campbell responded that it is not. Kathy Abbass commented that the raised railroad tracks probably protect the area from tidal influence.


S. Parker (Tetra Tech) stated there is no current field work activity. Sediment sampling will be conducted at Coddington Cove in the summer. Field work for Tank Farms 1, 2, and 3 will occur in the late summer/fall. The OFFTA revetment construction is restarting.


Thurston Gray reported that 6 of 17 members were present at the meeting. Dan Sullivan, Manny Marques, John Vitkevich, and Lisa Rama (Public Affairs Officer) had sent emails that they couldn’t attend the meeting. Thurston Gray reported that he had contacted Emmet Turley and that Emmet had explained that he doesn’t drive at night which is why he hasn’t been present at the RAB meetings.


It was suggested that there should be more communication between the Navy and the Aquidneck Planning Committee. D. Dorocz stated that he will try to improve communication with them and will add Tina Dolen to the RAB distribution list.

To follow up from the March RAB meeting, D. Dorocz told Howard Porter that the soil stockpiling work is finished at Tank Farm 5 so there shouldn’t be any more noise issues. D. Dorocz told Howard Porter to inform him if there are any additional problems with noise.

Deb Moore (Navy) stated that the replacement IR site warning signs have not been made yet, but the work order has been placed for them.

Maritza Montegross (Navy) stated that the MRP scoring has been redone so there is now funding to conduct a removal action and remedial investigation for MRP Site 1. The scoring process and results will be presented at the next RAB meeting.


The next meeting of the RAB will be held on July 20, 2011 at 6:00 p.m.

Meeting adjourned at 7:15 PM.

(1) Attendance List
(2) Agenda
(3) Tetra Tech Presentation, Results of Coddington Cove Rubble Fill Area Study Area Screening Evaluation (SASE) Investigation (1,337 Kb)
(4) Site Progress Chart
(5) Naval Station Newport Study Area and Locus Plan, May 18, 2011

return to minutes