The Outer Banks Voice – Progress on cleanup of Buxton Navy site

By means of Chicken Tabb | Outer Banks Voice on November 5, 2024

Questions arise in the Coast Guard area

By Kip Tabb | Outer Banks Voice

During a wide-ranging community meeting in Buxton on Monday evening at the Fessenden Center, representatives from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) described progress made in mitigating contamination from a Cold War-era naval base. The base’s mission was to listen for enemy submarine activity.

The site was leased by the U.S. Navy from Cape Hatteras National Seashore from 1956 to 1982. After the Navy left, the Coast Guard used the site until 2010.

The cleanup of the Navy area falls under the provisions of the Formerly Used Defense Site Act (FUDS), which gives responsibility for site restoration to the USACE. The Coast Guard is responsible for returning the part of the base to its original condition.

According to Col. Ron Sturgeon, commander of the USACE Savannah District, significant progress has been made.

“To date, we have 657 cubic meters of oil-affected land,” the audience said. “For better visualization, that is roughly 55 truckloads of soil. We also removed permanent infrastructure and debris that prevented our access to contaminated land. To date, we have removed 138,000 pounds of concrete, over 1,100 feet of pipe, including metal pipe and PVC pipe, as well as over 1,000 feet of metal cables and wires.”

The removal of infrastructure is significant. This has not been done in the past, and under the provisions of the FUDS Act, the USACE has no authority to remove infrastructure unless it is the only way to reach the source of the pollution.

Most of the infrastructure and contamination that has been removed comes from Building 19 of the Marine Park. The building was one of the larger buildings on the site when in use.
Noting that work on Building 19 would soon end, Sturgeon made it clear that more work remained to be done and that the USACE would continue its work. steps,” adding a contract for sampling “will be awarded on November 15.”

“We will work with the DEQ (NC Department of Environmental Quality) and the National Park Service to figure out where things go for next steps,” he said.

When asked why the contaminants were never found during two previous USACE cleanups at the site in 1989 and 2005, Sturgeon pointed to a dynamic coastline that had retreated dramatically.

“I think there was still five meters of sand on the beach during sampling. So if you look at erosion over time, from the 1950s to the 1970s to today, Building 19, the main source of the infrastructure, was 200 to 300 meters from the ocean. Now it’s in the ocean,” he said.

While most of the meeting focused on USACE progress at the site, representatives of a recently released report on the area of ​​the site used by the Coast Guard, WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure, were present.

Although the report identified a number of contaminants, the level of contamination was not sufficient to require mitigation, according to WSP’s Matt Allen, noting that there are two standards that can be applied: industrial with a higher threshold and residential, which is more stringent .

“They are (pollutants) compared to industry commercial standards because that is the use of the property at this time,” he told the Voice. “Residential is only used if someone lives there or if there is something like a daycare center or hospital.”

When asked by The Voice whether the industry standard met the expectations of the National Park Service, CHNS Superintendent Dave Hallac indicated that it did not.

“We would always want a level of contamination that is below the standard for homes, or perhaps not even measurable,” he said. “So we will look at the Coast Guard report and then communicate with them what our typical standard is.”

Hallac’s position is supported by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality.

“That’s actually the call from the Park Service. It’s their house. We will support them,” said Bill Hunneke, DEQ Superfund Division Chief.

The meeting also discussed what form future communication with the public would take. Two options were presented.

The USACE had held a number of public meetings to let the Buxton community know what is happening with the cleanup efforts, and according to Alexandra Jangrell-Tackett, program manager for Dawson Solutions, who presented the two options, public meetings “still provide that flow . of information from the community and USACE.”

The other option, a Restoration Advisory Board (RAB), is a more formalized process.

“A RAB is a stakeholder advisory group that works on communication between the DoD (Department of Defense)… and the local community. RABs are established where the USACE has environmental oversight of a FUDS property… and it allows for the exchange of information, any concerns, needs or values ​​that the community wants to address,” Tackett said.

A RAB does require a time investment from board members. Typically six to eight hours per month, Tackett noted.

Unlike public meetings, which occur at irregular intervals, a RAB is required to hold regularly scheduled meetings. These meetings and any information the board collects should be “available to other public stakeholders or local groups and organizations to ensure that you understand what they are trying to get out of ongoing activities,” she said.

Tackett also pointed out that a RAB can request information from regulators and representatives.

A RAB is co-chaired by a community member and a DOD appointment.

When asked by The Voice if she had a preference, Buxton Civic Association board member Heather Jennette felt public meetings were good, but the RAB was the better option.

“I like this format. I like the idea of ​​continued public meetings,” she said, referring to the Nov. 4 meeting. “But I think our fear is that one side will give up too easily if the trip is no longer convenient, or if people aren’t making enough noise at that point.”

The USACE is conducting a survey of the public through December 4 to determine interest in a RAB. Click here to get the questionnaire.

---