Intrinsic Remediation

[dbkGU@hamp.hampshire.edu]

Posting from "David Keith (ISIS)" <dbkGU@hamp.hampshire.edu>

 Does anyone have comments on "intrinsic remediation," also known as 
"natural attenuation"? The USAF Center for Environmental Excellence is 
sponsoring its application at Westover ARB, where I am serving as 
co-chair of a RAB. In my understanding, the root assumption is that 
groundwater contaminants will be diluted, adsorbed, or broken down by 
microbial processes over both time and distance of migration. So 
intrinsic remediation is considered in situations where contaminants 
should "naturally" achieve non-hazardous levels more quickly than they 
can migrate to areas in which people might be exposed. 

 In short, it means they let it rot, albeit with "aggressive monitoring."
The theory works best with fuel-related spills, not more persistent 
contaminants, so characterization of contaminants present is an issue here.

 Lenny's newsletter argues that a justification for clean-up funding 
has been the likelihood that delay in funding clean-ups will only increase 
final costs as contaminants spread. I am concerned that we are participating in
studies to prove the opposite. I anticipate that as this approach is more
widely applied, monitoring and contaminant characterization will become 
less and less stringent. 

 I frankly do not know whether the approach may be warranted here at
Westover, but suspect that whatever the merits here, studies like this 
will be used to argue that the danger of soil and groundwater contamination 
has been exaggerated and that funding can safely be cut. Such justifications 
could be used in Congress, but also within the military itself. 

 Is it science or wishful thinking? --David Keith