Business Title: Project Manager

Authors: Elise Allen

Keywords: Partnering, Flight Training Base, Remediation, BRAC, Glenview, Illinois

Abstract:

NAS Glenview was a WWII era flight training facility in suburban Chicago Illinois. The base was on the BRAC 3 list (1993) and was slated for closure in 1995 and complete turnover to the Local Reuse Authority (LRA) in approximately 1999. The BRAC Cleanup Team (BCT) was comprised of The Navy, the USEPA and the Illinois EPA (IEPA). These three members were supported by technical and managerial team members from the Navy Southern Division and Great Lakes Base, various USEPA and IEPA technical staffers, the Navy’s Comprehensive Long-Term Environmental Contractor (CLEAN) contractor (EnSafe), and the Environmental Restoration Action Contractor (ERAC) (Washington Group International - Formerly the Morrison Knudsen Corporation).

The BCT was formed and a resident’s advisory board (RAB) was also formed. The BCT planned and performed investigations to determine what environmental risks were at the base and the best remedial technology for mitigating the risk. While the assignment was "cleanup the base" the second assignment was develop a team that can work together to streamline the process and allow quicker turnover of the base. In the first years, the team worked together to develop the cleanup goals and the teams goals. Review of investigation plans and results led into the remediation work plans and determining whether the cleanup objectives had been met. The Village of Glenview also evaluated the site and determined the best reuse plan for their needs.

Following the guidelines set out in the BRAC guidance documents, the work progresses. The real story behind this base reutilization story is the informal and formal partnering that was behind all activities. The organizations involved managed to keep their staff contacts with the Team fairly constant so trust was developed between the various parties. As the Remediation contractor, WGI/MK was brought into the process part way into the project. With the same parties available for the project (over the years), cost and time saving options were presented and accepted. Environmental quality was not sacrificed. With the relationships that were developed, options to do things differently were able to be presented and discussed without being rejected outright.