'Grossly premature.' Cape environmental leader slams push for bids on machine gun range

Editor's note: Two corrections were made to this story on July 5, 2023 — to a quote by Massachusetts Army National Guard spokesman Don Veitch and to explain the role of the Science Advisory Council.

The Massachusetts Army National Guard is moving forward with the bidding process for a proposed machine gun range on Joint Base Cape Cod, despite a lack of state approval and pending a final decision by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that could threaten the project.

The Massachusetts Military Division released a public notice on June 22 soliciting bids from contractors to build a proposed Automated Multipurpose Machine Gun Range within Camp Edwards JBCC, estimated to cost $8.9 million, according to the release notice. The project has been roundly criticized for its potential environmental impact on the Upper Cape’s sole source aquifer — a water source for more than 220,000 people.

Massachusetts Army National Guard spokesperson Don Veitch said the Guard was able to secure federal funding authorization three years ago due to its compliance with state law Chapter 47, which states all military training should be compatible with and amenable to the environment.

“It's congressionally approved and it's included on the Defense Authorization Act of 2020,” Veitch said. “The bidding is going forward, because that's the required process that we have to go through because it is a federally funded project.”

Andrew Gottlieb, the executive director of the Association to Preserve Cape Cod, said conflating congressional funding approval with actual state authorization is misrepresenting the process and called the move to solicit bids “grossly premature.”

Under state law, the Massachusetts Army National Guard would need to secure approval from the Environmental Management Commission, which Gottlieb said had not been done, as well as survive a final determination by the EPA.

“To characterize congressional funding authorization for permitting authority is yet another misrepresentation of the facts around this case, and it has been their mode of operation throughout the conception and pursuit of this project,” Gottlieb said. “Full stop, they do not have authority to construct this project right now.”

EPA New England Region spokesperson Dave Deegan said in an emailed statement they were “not previously aware” the Massachusetts Army National Guard were soliciting bids for the machine gun range at this time.

The EPA released a draft determination in April, finding the project “may contaminate the Cape Cod Aquifer, thereby creating a significant public health hazard.” The EPA then requested public comment over a period of 60 days — that term expired Monday.

“If the EPA determines that their initial finding was the correct one, then under federal law no federal money would be allowed to be used to construct that facility, which is currently slated for federal funding under the Department of Defense authorizations,” Gottlieb said.

Massachusetts Army National Guard Col. Nathan Wilder, a Construction Facilities Management Officer, said past EPA decisions supported the Guard’s current position that a machine gun range at the slated location would not harm the water source.

“We certainly feel comfortable,” Wilder said. “All the scientific data, all the years of experience, and furthermore, in partnership with Massachusetts environmental regulators and the EMC oversight board, we can do this and will do this properly.”

In 2015, an EPA decision found that the “overall results of groundwater evaluations conducted to date indicate that the small arms ranges are not currently a source of any significant groundwater contamination.” Veitch said “small arms” are considered any firearm under .50 caliber.

Gottlieb said using the 2015 EPA decision to rationalize the current machine gun range plan is a “distortion” of the situation because the prior determination was used to justify another type of range and weaponry.

“The EPA 2015 determination was based on the small arms range practices in effect at that time, and the analysis that they did going forward was for a fundamentally different type of range,” he said. “They are going to use a significantly different caliber of weaponry, that have a much larger physical-spatial impact, as well as a four times higher munitions load.”

Citing their need to be compliant with the Department of the Army’s updated qualification standards, Veitch said the automated machine gun range is necessary because the Army no longer allows soldiers to qualify on paper targets — it must be done on “pop-up ranges” like the one proposed for Camp Edwards.

Veitch also said the Massachusetts Army National Guard is only allotted 24 weekend training days, as well as a 15-day training period. A relatively limited time, he said, when considering the Army has all year long for training.

“One of the big concerns is, why can't this range be placed somewhere else,” Veitch said. “Currently, there is no facility or there isn't a facility in Massachusetts that can provide adequate weapons qualification for crew-served weapons in the state.”

While there has been some discussion about Fort Devens being another suitable location for the machine gun range, Veitch said that location is an Army Reserve installation and thus prioritizes reserve forces over the National Guard.

“We will fire on that range occasionally, but we're not their priority,” he said. “You may have a scheduled range on Fort Devens, but it might be taken away from you if an Army Reserve unit comes forward and says, ‘Hey, I need this range right now because we have soldiers deploying.’ And that's why this will provide us the opportunity to have a range that is controlled by us that will focus primarily on National Guard soldiers to be trained first.”

In an internal Environmental Assessment commissioned by the Massachusetts Army National Guard, the Science Advisory Council concluded that the “implementation of the Proposed Action would not have a significant impact on the quality of the human or natural environment.”

The Science Advisory Council advises the Environmental Management Commission on technical issues related to the oversight of the northern 15,000 acres of Joint Base Cape Cod.

In light of recent skepticism, Veitch said the Massachusetts Army National Guard has worked to reconnect with the community by implementing tours of the base and inviting public comment regarding the machine gun range.

“We can't point to one thing and say this is why people are opposed to it other than to say they're concerned about the aquifer, and we are as well,” Veitch said. “That's why we put so much effort into studying the problem, making sure we have the correct solutions.”

A 30-day public review period was requested by the EA, which Gottlieb said was met with around 390 comments — the vast majority were skeptical and critical, addressing various concerns with the EA’s findings.

“In evaluating those public comments, they saw fit to give weight to not one single solitary comment, or change the analysis in any way, shape or form,” Gottlieb said. “And they then certified their own analysis, internally, without any external review.”

Mark Forest, Chairman of the Barnstable County Board of Regional Commissioners, said the proposal to construct the machine gun range atop the aquifer poses an “unacceptable risk” to the Cape’s source of drinking water.

“I think we're not going to get to a point where there’s conclusive proof and evidence to suggest that there'll be a catastrophe. No, it's really coming down to managing risks. And I think what we're trying to do is stay at a very high threshold for that risk,” he said.

Thanks to our subscribers, who help make this coverage possible. If you are not a subscriber, please consider supporting quality local journalism with a Cape Cod Times subscription. Here are our subscription plans.

This article originally appeared on Cape Cod Times: Cape Edwards machine gun range moving ahead despite public concerns