Naval Station Newport, Rhode Island

Wednesday, November 28, 2012, 6:30 – 8:00 pm
Officer’s Club, NAVSTA Newport

The NAVSTA Newport Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) gathered at the Constellation Room in the Officers Club at Naval Station Newport, Newport, RI for their bimonthly meeting on Wednesday, November 28, 2012. The meeting started at 6:30 pm. See the enclosed meeting agenda and attendance list.

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


The meeting minutes from the September 19, 2012 meeting were approved.


Mark Kauffman (Resolution Consultants) presented a brief overview of the Site Progress Milestone Chart enclosed and explained that this version varied slightly in format and provides an update of site progress.

Melissa Cannon (Resolution Consultants), M. Kauffman and Steve Parker (Tetra Tech) provided an update on specific sites on the Document Review Status list enclosed. During this discussion, the following clarifications were made:
  • S. Parker indicated that a decision was made today to not address the manganese in groundwater and that it will be addressed in an SASE Addendum
  • Dominic O’Connor (Navy MIDLANT) introduced himself; he will be the Remedial Project Manager (RPM) for Derecktor Shipyard and Coddington Point sites
  • D. Dorocz clarified that the point of the document review status was to let the RAB know where things stand, either what has been finalized or what is still in progress.


    S. Parker presented the Feasibility Study (FS) and Potential Remedial Alternatives for Category 1 Areas of Tank Farms 4 and 5 enclosed.

    Margaret Kirshner asked how background is determined. S. Parker explained that a background data set was developed for the base that consisted of data from samples collected both on and off base from unimpacted and undeveloped areas.

    M. Kirshner, Claudette Weissinger, and Dave Brown asked questions about arsenic and manganese relative to S. Parker’s presentation. The RAB questioned (1) whether arsenic concentrations above the regulatory standard would require cleanup, (2) if there are new arsenic standards, and (3) whether there are nearby sites with similar arsenic or metals concentrations.

    S. Parker explained that cleanup is typically based on a statistical average of concentrations, not single points. Kymberlee Keckler (USEPA) explained that in New England due to the bedrock, it’s common to see higher concentrations of arsenic and manganese. Dave Brown noted that it may be a cost feasibility issue in cleaning up typical levels of arsenic, rather than cleaning up to an absolute standard. S. Parker re-emphasized that because the sites are regulated under CERCLA, the attempt is to do what makes sense with respect to background conditions.

    M. Kirshner asked if multiple contaminants create an issue for risk. S. Parker explained that the risk calculations quantify cumulative risk from multiple chemicals.

    Kathy Abbass asked for clarification on the status of the FS for Tank Farms 4 and 5. S. Parker clarified that the final FS documents are in January and February 2013.

    K. Abbass and D. Brown questioned if the FS was to clean up to industrial or residential use. S. Parker explained that industrial use cleanup is most likely, with a land use control (LUC) preventing contact with impacted material. Cleanup to a residential standard would require excavation of very large areas. Additional cleanup would be required if the land use changes to residential use. D. Dorocz explained that the site is not likely to be residential use in the future.


    Maritza Montegross (Navy MIDLANT) presented a FY12 Expended and FY13 Execution Plan budget summary (enclosed). M. Montegross clarified that FY12 is when it was appropriated and funding can be good for five years.

    K. Abbass questioned what Site 23 is. It was clarified that this site was comprised of several areas on Coddington Point where asbestos in soil was discovered.

    K. Keckler questioned the budget for partnering. M. Montegross indicated she would need to look into it.

    K. Abbass questioned why FY13 was not broken down by site. M. Montegross explained the government estimates for this work cannot be released before the work is awarded.

    K. Abbass asked for clarification on the break between FY12 and FY13 and how FY13 would be awarded. M. Montegross explained that 10/1/12 was the start of FY13 and that the sites would be awarded as needed.

    D. Brown questioned whether there was a “squeeze” on federal funding. M. Montegross explained that this has not been the case, that it depends on how fast things move along, that funds can re-appropriated, and that she is not aware of any major cuts that have impacted progress in Newport.


    There was no committee or regulatory (RIDEM and USEPA) reports.


    D. Dorocz went through the existing name plates with the membership and decided which ones to keep for future meetings. Resolution Consultants will be preparing updated name plates for the next meeting.

    D. Brown commented that there is a need to energize the RAB with younger members. There was a brief discussion on possible ideas to gain interest of perspective members.


    The next meeting of the RAB will be held on January 16, 2013 at 6:30 pm at the Officers Club at Naval Station Newport. There were no topics formally determined for the next meeting.


    The meeting adjourned at 8:00 pm.

    D. D. Dorocz

    Meeting Agenda
    Attendance Sheet
    Site Progress Milestones
    Document Review Status
    FS and Potential Remedial Alternatives, Category 1 Areas, Tank Farms 4 and 5
    FY12 Actual Costs and FY13 Execution Plan
    return to minutes