Mixed bag for Moffett makeover
Full cleanup likely at Site 25, demolition an option for Hangar One

At several public events last week, officials indicated that they could afford to clean up a polluted Moffett Field wetlands area to a level that should make just about everybody happy.

The next day, those same officials were in the unenviable position of announcing that they may have to knock down Hangar One, an idea that did not sit too well with long-time residents.

That's life for the Navy these days: For every bit of good news, the bad news is close behind.

Officials say there will be plenty of good news in an upcoming report on the cleanup of the wetlands area known as Site 25. But, if last week's Restoration Advisory Board meeting is any indication, the bad news on Hangar One could wind up attracting most of the public's attention.

A full cleanup at Site 25, a polluted drainage pond now used by NASA, looks like it will cost the Navy millions less than expected, bringing a pitched battle between local residents and two federal agencies closer to resolution.

At an open house last Wednesday and a tour the next day of the polluted areas, officials all but announced they were planning a full cleanup at Site 25, which was once a wetlands. The plan would remove enough toxic chemicals to allow Site 25 to be restored to tidal marsh.

Recent cost estimates pegged the price of such a cleanup at $5 million to $5.5 million -- about half of what officials were expecting.

"It looks far more reasonable to clean it up to the highest standard than ever before," said Briggs Nisbet, a campaign manager for Save the Bay, the Oakland-based nonprofit that has led a public campaign against the Navy.

Save the Bay's fight over Site 25 has included a letter-writing campaign, rallies, input from elected leaders, and more. Last year, for instance, the group put out a full-page ad depicting mutated versions of wetlands animals -- such as a clapper rail with ten legs -- along with the statement, "Toxic chemicals might not be the only thing the Navy leaves behind at Moffett Field."

Rick Weisenborn, the Moffett clean-up manager for the Navy, said the recent public comment session was valuable and all part of the Navy's decision-making process.

"If you're feelings get hurt from people putting pictures of funny birds in the paper," he said, "you shouldn't be in the business."

The minimum cleanup required at Site 25, enough to protect the migratory birds that currently water at the pond during the winter months, would cost $3 million. A NASA plan proposed last November to bring fish back to part of the site, while continuing to use it for stormwater retention, would actually require the most expensive cleanup at about $7 million.

"There's going to be a lot of pleasantly surprised people," Navy clean-up manager Weisenborn told the members of the Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) last Thursday.

On the other hand, a not-so-pleasant surprise could be in store for fans of Hangar One.

Navy officials have been considering knocking down the massive landmark for nearly two years. In response, some RAB members and long-time residents have demanded a commitment from the Navy not to demolish the aging shell, however toxic.

"I fly over it every day, I love that building," said Larry Shapiro, who owns a private air show company in Palo Alto.

But Navy officials said they are legally required to consider demolition.

"Our number one job is to make it environmentally safe," said Weisenborn. He added, "The Navy's not in the business of doing historic preservation."

Built in 1933, the 200-foot-high hangar was made from steel that was dipped in a series of toxic solutions, including hot zinc, asbestos and an asphalt adhesive.

As a result of that process, chemicals like PCBs, lead, zinc and asbestos now make up nearly 20 percent of the building's structural materials. By comparison, the federal safe level for PCBs in soil is 0.2 parts per billion. Despite efforts to contain them, the contaminants are continuing to flake off and leech into the environment around the hangar.

Weisenborn explained all of this to a stunned group at the RAB meeting, calling the building "an existing, imminent threat to human health and the environment."

"Well, duh, we have a problem," he said. "We're fully aware of it, we admit it, we're going to clean it up."

Before discovering the contamination problem in 2003, NASA estimated that tearing down the building would cost nearly $30 million. After NASA found a unique type of PCB at Site 25 and traced it to the hangar, the Navy responded by spending $3 million to add a heavy coat of paint to the outside.

But the paint is wearing thin, and time is running out for the Navy to make a decision. Weisenborn said that continuing to add coats of paint could cause the building to collapse. Other potential solutions -- sandblasting the building or encapsulating it with shells inside and out -- would cost a fortune and are not guaranteed to work, he told the RAB.

"There's PCB dust all over everything," said NASA environmental chief Sandy Olliges. "It's in the dust, it's in the air, it's going into the wetlands, into the environment."

That problem could worsen during demolition, which is why the Navy is hoping to conduct the work during the rainy season. Weisenborn said Navy contractors are scouring the Internet for ways that they might be able to treat the building materials, but so far have come up empty-handed.

The Navy has scheduled an open house on Hangar One on June 13. A preliminary recommendation is due on August 3, followed by 45 days for public review. The Navy says it will make a decision on Site 25 by September. Work on both sites should be completed by late next year.

Whatever happens at Site 25 and Hangar One, visions of new uses for each location will be determined by NASA, which bought Moffett from the Navy in 1994.

While pressure from groups like Save the Bay may have been instrumental in convincing NASA to back a partial restoration at Site 25, the agency maintains that it needs the pond to manage its runoff during the rainy season. A restoration project would require spreading several feet of dirt over an area spanning 260 acres, since the site has sunk several feet below sea level as a result of nearby agricultural uses in the first part of the last century.

NASA's past stance against letting the Bay Trail go through the area -- it currently ends at the Stevens Creek Trail just west of Moffett -- has rankled some residents, but a change in leadership at NASA/Ames could signal a new opportunity for trail advocates.

"It's the next big issue," said Save the Bay's Nisbet.

If that's the case, somebody else is going to have to lead the fight. Nisbet is losing her job at the end of the week as her legendary organization scales back its involvement in politics. The positions of community organizer and communications director were also recently eliminated.

At Hangar One, the plans for a museum and theme park inside the spacious structure are going to remain only plans for at least a little while longer. But if SpaceWorld Hangar One, a nonprofit endeavor which organizers once said could cost $380 million to build, does somehow wind up using the troubled landmark as a home, Navy officials can expect a lot of good will from the community for their efforts -- at least until it's time to clean up Orion Park.

E-mail Jon Wiener at jwiener@mv-voice.com

Copyright © 2005 Embarcadero Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
Reproduction or online links to anything other than the home page
without permission is strictly prohibited.