1 From:
Sent: Friday, July 03, 2015 8:19 PM
To: RedHill Subject: Red Hill AOC Comments

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

To Whom it May Concern,

As a nearby Red Hill resident and a mother, I had some comments on the proposed AOC regarding the Red Hill Bulk Storage Facility. Based on the St atement of Work, I understand the main components of the project that will be undertaken by the Navy to be:

1) Improvement of tank inspection and repair process 2) Conduct a study to investig ate tank upgrade alternatives. Within 22 y ears, all tanks shall be upgraded using

BAPT or be taken out of service. 3) In the interim, Navy will increase frequency of tank tightness testing 4) A better groundwater flow model will be developed to understand the flow path of the contaminants. 5) Assessment of impact of cont aminants on the ground water supply

While I feel like this plan is generally a good idea , I think actual implementa tion of tank upgrades and mediation/clean up efforts needs to start today. The January 2014 fuel leak wasn't the first to occur, although it was the first time I had heard of it. Apparently fuel leak s have occurred multiple times in the past. My concern is that by the time upgrades are constructed, the ground water will already be contaminated. I worry that in the future, my daughter will not ha ve clean water to drink.

According to the SOW, in 1998 and 2008 upgrade feasibi lity studies were conducted by the Navy. What was the outcome of these studies? Was anything constructed? Since these tanks are over 70 years old, they can't be in great condition. At the end of the 22 years for completion of BAPT, these tanks will be almost 100 years old. Considering that these upgrades are pr oposed to be done in phases, the last batch will be done when the tanks are 90+ years old. While I do understand the need for a pla nning process and wanting to find the best, most cost effective alternative, at some point we need to be proactive and do someth ing before a fuel leak occurs that renders are ground water undrinkable. Is it possible to star t by lining the tank that's in the worst condition? It could be done as a pilot project, ongoing while the upgrade investigation st udy is being performed. It might not be the best solution, but it does make the tank more leak proof than repairing and pa tching. It's also probably a lot cheaper than installing secondary containment or taking the tank out of serv ice and building an above ground storage tank. Or if there's differ ent lining technologies, perhaps they could be installed on several tanks and the performance and constructa bility of each could be evaluate d as part of the upgrade study.

Is it possible to start the clean up of contaminants now, while the study of groundwater flow and impact of contaminants is being conducted? Again, there's alwa ys going to be better m eans and methods coming out,

however I feel we should use whatever best resources we have today to cl ean up the contaminants as best we can. It just can't be good for the environment to have fuel leaking into the ground, especially near a drinking water source. Additionally, I'm sure no one wants to be the guinea pig as to what level of contaminant our

bodies can handle.

I do appreciate the efforts and long term studies propos ed to be done under the AOC, however I would suggest proactive measures be implemented wh ile these studies are being conducted.2 Sincerely,