MOFFETT RAB SUCCESS ON LANDFILLS

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>]

MOFFETT FIELD RAB SUCCESS
[I have always envisioned this newsgroup as an opportunity for 
Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) members and others to compare their 
experiences, not just a vehicle for me to post national news. I 
understand that RABs across the country are finding a wide variety of 
responses not only from the military, but from regulatory agencies. I 
invite you therefore, to share those stories, even if they are 
preliminary in nature. Here's a success story involving the Moffett 
Field (former Naval Air Station) RAB. - Lenny Siegel]
Early last year, the Navy proposed a plan for capping two former 
landfills located on the historic wetlands portion of Moffett Field. It 
selected a soil cap, rather than a more expensive multilayer cap, 
because it believed that the less expensive cap would be just as effective.
The Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition - of which I am a member - was 
prepared to accept the general outline of the Navy plan. However, with 
the aid of our technical consultants, we proposed minor changes in 
monitoring and contingency planning.
Similarly, state regulators who specialize in groundwater pollution 
were prepared to accept the general outline of the plan.
By last June, when the Navy formally put its landfill-capping plan out 
for public comment, the RAB was up and running. Members of the RAB who 
had worked with local governments, most of which have had landfill 
capping projects of their own, raised concerns, pointing out that the 
Navy was proposing a less complete remedy than its civilian 
counterparts - the local cities - had carried out.
As a result, representatives of the state regulatory branch that 
regulates landfills was brought in, and they reinforced the concerns of 
the RAB members
In response, in December the Navy proposed a new remedy, comparable to 
other local landfill caps. Technically, the new proposal lies between 
the two old alternatives. At a total estimated cost of $4.9 million, it 
is higher than the old preferred remedy (estimated to cost $3.2 
million), but less than the rejected alternative ($7.8 million).
Although the new plan is still out for comment, it appears to have 
widespread support. Members of the RAB consider it a success story. In 
fact, it illustrates the value of including a variety of constituencies 
on the advisory board.
Depending upon what one thinks would have happened if the RAB had not 
taken part in decision-making, the public involvement process either 
cost the Navy $1.7 million or saved it $2.9 million. In the long run, 
it obviously strengthened the Moffett cleanup program.