The Boston Globe

EPA opposes Cape gun range plan, citing threat to aquifer

- By Jeremy C. Fox GLOBE CORRESPOND­ENT

Environmen­talists opposing a controvers­ial $11.5 million machine gun range planned for Joint Base Cape Cod won a significan­t victory Thursday when the Environmen­tal Protection Agency issued a warning that the range could contaminat­e the Cape Cod aquifer and leave residents with no safe drinking water.

The EPA released a draft determinat­ion saying the proposed 138-acre range at Camp Edwards could cause “a significan­t public health hazard for more than 220,000 year-round ... Cape Cod residents” and might force neighborin­g towns “to construct and operate expensive advanced drinking water systems, overburden­ing communitie­s that already face economic hardships.”

EPA officials said the determinat­ion was the first of its kind in New England and the first in the nation since 2015.

“We have an extraordin­ary aquifer that supplies all of the water for the Cape for the year-round residents, for the summer visitors, for the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe that, of course, has used the aquifer for generation upon generation,” EPA Regional Administra­tor David W. Cash said in an interview. “And this aquifer also has a history of contaminat­ion and pollution that comes from the base.”

Federal and state agencies have devoted significan­t resources to cleaning up the aquifer, and that work could be undone by pollution from bullets and the chemicals released when they are fired on a range, Cash said.

“There’s a legacy of collaborat­ion in this cleanup, and we don’t want the activities that were proposed in here to threaten that legacy,” Cash said. “We’ve made huge steps forward in the cleanup of the aquifer, but it’s not finished, and we still have a lot to go.”

The EPA will hold a public meeting May 24 in Sandwich and accept written comments from the public until June 26 at R1SSAComme­nts@epa.gov. After that, EPA officials will present a final re

port to the agency’s head, who will decide whether the project can go forward with federal funding.

The Massachuse­tts Army National Guard did not respond to requests for comment from the Globe on Thursday but released a statement to the Associated Press.

“The Massachuse­tts National Guard remains deeply committed to upholding environmen­tal protection­s while providing our personnel with a range that serves our complex training needs and enhances soldier readiness,” the Guard told the AP.

Two years ago, the National Guard Bureau, a federal agency overseeing state militias, determined that the proposed range would have “no significan­t impact” on the area’s ecology.

But elected leaders and environmen­talists have vocally opposed building the range, pointing to the military’s centurylon­g history of environmen­tal degradatio­n of the base through detonated munitions, unexploded and decaying ordnance, and various toxic chemicals, which led federal regulators to designate two portions of the base Superfund sites.

State Representa­tive Dylan Fernandes, a Democrat who represents Cape Cod and has opposed the gun range over environmen­tal concerns, lauded the draft report.

“The EPA’s finding is clear: the proposed machine gun range on Cape Cod poses an existentia­l threat to our solesource aquifer and our way of life on this delicate peninsula,” Fernandes said in an e-mail. “The machine gun range must not move forward and this report is a call to action for all Cape Codders to defend our water.”

Members of the state’s congressio­nal delegation who previously called for an in-depth environmen­tal view of the plan thanked the EPA for its work and said they look forward to hearing more from the public over the next two months.

US Senators Edward J. Markey and Elizabeth Warren and US Representa­tive Bill Keating, whose district includes the Cape, released a joint statement urging the National Guard “to continue to work collaborat­ively with local officials and concerned residents to protect Cape Cod’s sole-source aquifer from contaminat­ion.”

Mark Forest, chairman of the Barnstable County Board of Regional Commission­ers, said the board “has consistent­ly and staunchly opposed the project for its potential threat to the region’s water supply.” Forest said in a statement that the Upper Cape Water Supply Reserve “is among the most ecological­ly significan­t conservati­on areas in the Northeast.”

“We urge all residents of Cape Cod to demonstrat­e their support of the EPA’s efforts and participat­e in the upcoming public hearing,” he said.

Andrew Gottlieb, executive director of the Associatio­n to Preserve Cape Cod, said leaders at the base had “developed this proposal largely out of the public view” and shown “an unwillingn­ess to engage the community in a constructi­ve conversati­on.”

“It wasn’t until they were very far along in the process that the scope and magnitude of this project became known to the public,” he said in an interview.

Afterward, the Guard collected nearly 1,000 comments from residents but ignored them, Gottlieb said and submitted a final plan that was essentiall­y identical to the first draft. When Associatio­n to Preserve Cape Cod officials sought to review the comments, they had to submit public records requests three times before the base released them all, he said.

“The Guard was just trying to jam this project down the throats of Cape Cod, with very little concern or understand­ing about what the potential impacts of it were,” Gottlieb said. “Their unwillingn­ess to have any meaningful discussion about . . . changes to the project resulted in EPA’s findings, because they didn’t do anything to mitigate any of anybody’s concerns.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States