Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
EPA says tank cleaning schedule is in AOC; public raises testing irregularities and data transparency concerns
Loading...
Summary
EPA told the commission tank cleaning is governed by an Administrative Order on Consent and that the Navy is in compliance, while community members pressed for transparency about sampling procedures, missing analytes, and lab discrepancies and requested written confirmation about Camp Smith tank cleaning.
At the Nov. 19 meeting the Environmental Protection Agency told the commission that cleaning of water storage tanks is part of the Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) and that the Navy is currently meeting those requirements.
Amy Miller, speaking for EPA, said the agency’s work includes site remediation and pollutant‑source identification and that ensuring drinking‑water infrastructure and monitoring remains a priority. Navy representatives said the system was recovered under a recovery plan approved by DOH and EPA and that extensive monitoring (over 36 months) has been conducted.
Multiple public commenters pushed back, describing alleged irregularities in the Navy’s sampling program: delayed retesting after collection, samples stored without refrigeration, redaction of chromatograms, and decisions to stop reporting some analytes that had previously been detected. Commenters asked whether DOH will use regulatory authority to create binding remediation standards for jet fuel and sought more transparency about which labs were used and why results sometimes differed between labs.
Camp Smith tank: Commenters said some tanks (cited as Camp Smith SP‑26) had not been fully cleaned since 2013; EPA said tank cleaning schedules were set in the AOC and that the Navy was in compliance with those schedules, but the commission asked the Navy to confirm inspection and cleaning status for specific tanks and to provide written follow‑up.
Why it matters: Citizens said apparent sampling and reporting issues undermine public confidence in the data used to judge water safety. Regulators emphasized that schedules and oversight exist but acknowledged ongoing work.
What was asked: The public asked for copies of legacy records regarding fuel storage and internal tank coatings, for immediate access to preliminary testing results, and for a clear explanation of which contaminants the planned treatment system is designed to remove. EPA and Navy representatives said responses and adjudications of comments would be provided in follow‑up documents and made available online.
