Welcome and Meeting Overview
City and County officials from local communities from around the United States, whose neighbors are United States Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, met in Westminster, Colorado on April 8-9 to discuss long-term stewardship and institutional controls. Energy Communities Alliance (ECA) and the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) conducted the meeting in order to educate local government officials about long-term stewardship and to obtain input from local governments on their role, capability, and interest in working on and implementing institutional controls and long-term stewardship in, and adjacent to, their communities. Participants also discussed stewardship issues regarding land that will be retained by the Federal government and land that will be conveyed out of Federal ownership. Several representatives from the Department of Energy (DOE) also participated in the meeting. ECA and ELI plan to select at least three sites, and conduct case studies on the role of local government in the selection and implementation of long-term stewardship and institutional controls.
ECA Executive Director, Seth Kirshenberg, and ELI Director of the Center for State, Local & Regional Environmental Programs, John Pendergrass, opened the meeting with a primer on institutional controls and long-term stewardship, followed by a meeting overview to define the issues, outline the project goals, and to provide an overview of some of the ongoing activities among the various groups studying the issues and their conclusions. Kirshenberg stressed that even though the type of institutional controls will vary from site to site, the unifying concern among most communities is how to ensure that over time, the remediation at the facilities will remain protective of human health and the environment.
One of the DOE representatives, who pointed out that residual hazards
are inevitable, asked participants to consider the consequences of environmental
cleanup (the remediation of the environmental contaminants on the property)
30 years from now. He encouraged local governments to work in cooperation
with the federal government in order to address the risks and overhead
costs that will follow. Pendergrass noted that an essential component of
managing risks after cleanup is to decide how each institutional control
and long-term stewardship mechanism will work, who will operate that mechanism,
and who will be responsible for long-term stewardship activities of the
site.
Site-Specific Presentations
ROCKY FLATS
Site Overview
Located just northwest of Denver, Colorado, the Rocky Flats Site is located on a 384 acre Industrial Area and is surrounded by a 5,878 acre Buffer Zone. From 1952-1989, nuclear weapons components and assemblies were produced, using large quantities of plutonium and other metals. All production ended in 1992.
The Kaiser-Hill Company is currently the lead contractor undertaking the cleanup activities at the site, where nuclear materials are still being stored in a high-security protected area. Significant contamination is suspected to exist underground between buildings in the industrial area and in several areas of the buffer zone.
Present/Future Challenges
With a goal of accelerated closure by 2006, activities at the site are focused on remediation activities including the demolition and decommissioning of facilities. Under-building contamination is being addressed through characterization and remediation. Remaining contamination is being cleaned up and will eventually be moved off-site with all other wastes. Site officials intend to ship nuclear materials to Pantex; transuranic waste to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant; residues to Savannah River; and low-level residue/other to the Nevada Test Site, Envirocare, and other sites to be determined.
Stewardship Issues
The following stewardship issues have been identified by the Rocky Flats Coalition of Local Governments (RFCLOG):
Stewardship Dialogue: The Dialogue Planning Group
The Dialogue Planning Group (DPG) was convened by the Rocky Flats Local Impacts Initiative (RFLII) in January of 1998. The DPG began as an information discussion group, the participants identified numerous upcoming decisions affecting stewardship issues and thus determined that a stewardship dialogue must be initiated.
Participants in the DPG include officials/members of local governments adjacent to or owning land adjacent to Rocky Flats, State and Federal regulatory agencies, Kaiser-Hill, Department of Energy, the Rocky Flats Citizens Advisory Board, the Future Site Use Working Group, the Rocky Flats local Impacts Initiative, Congressman Skaggs Office and the Colorado Attorney General’s Office.
Early DPG discussions involved the need to define an achievable goal. They realized that stewardship issues are highly complex and concepts are interwoven. As a result, they determined that education must precede dialogue. A "white paper" was created as an education tool to define the issues, describe interrelationships, stimulate discussion, and build expertise.
The City of Westminster and the City of Arvada have full time employees and Jefferson County has a part time employee dedicated to site issues.
A complaint of the local government’s is that the local governments were not given remediation selection options with remediation technology, associated institutional controls, and accompanying costs. The biggest question is how will the costs associated with long-term stewardship activities be funded.
The local community feels it is ahead of DOE on stewardship issues and that DOE needs to move forward. Part of the problem is that site personnel come and go so quickly that institutional memory is lost. Also, DOE tends to look at cleanup in a piecemeal, rather than holistic, fashion.
One major contamination issue involves surface water. DOE has not yet determined the source of the contamination or decided on what to do with water that is flowing off-site.
A participant noted that Rocky Flats has a model contractor situation with performance based contracting. The contractor only gets paid for doing certain things. Long-term stewardship was not included in the contract.
Conclusions
The establishment of an informal, inclusive working group is an effective
way to build trust and openness. In addition, education should be a key
component of any stewardship program/process.
OAK RIDGE RESERVATION
Site Overview
The Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) is located approximately 15-20 miles from downtown Knoxville, is fully encompassed within the City of Oak Ridge and affects several communities adjacent to the site. Because of high rainfall in the area, runoff from the facilities is known to flow into the river system. Thus, activities at ORR impact the City as well as several communities downstream (Knox, Loudon, and Anderson Counties). The City has been involved in stewardship activities at the site, but they are trying to get other affected communities involved as well.
Stewardship Issues/Stewardship Working Group
In a 1996 Record of Decision discussing surface impoundments, DOE’s proposed plan did not involve communities in making cleanup decisions. However, the site-specific advisory board (SSAB) was involved in the determination of "how clean is clean", and stewardship was one issue involved in the determination.
As a result, the SSAB-developed Stewardship Working Group (SWG) was convened at the site. The SWG defines stewardship as "the acceptance of the responsibility and the implementation of activities necessary to maintain long-term protection of human health and of the environment from hazards posed by residual radioactive and chemically hazardous materials."
The SWG aimed to identify elements of an effective stewardship program, promote public understanding, develop long-term stewardship requirements, identify options and promote the commitment of adequate funding. Their studies have identified authority and funding as being key elements of stewardship. By December 1, 1999, SWG hopes to publish a report on the findings of its three subcommittees -- funding, stewards (roles) and information management (integration of information and accessibility for local governments, technical people and the public).
Proposal for On-Site Disposal Cell
Currently, a proposal to build an on-site disposal cell at the Oak Ridge Reservation is under consideration. The on-site disposal cell is significant because it would mean permanent acceptance of ORR as a disposal facility. Working Group members are working to ensure that there are provisions for funding and long-term stewardship in this proposed plan. The ROD will not be signed until provisions for long-term stewardship are included.
Oak Ridge stressed that mitigation measures for communities, resulting from the real or perceived image of contamination caused by DOE, must be discussed and addressed when discussing long-term stewardship.
The City explained that they are currently going through rulemaking involving the creation of a fund, managed by the state, for such things as oversight and long-term stewardship for the on-site disposal cell. The City also stressed that waste to be disposed at this facility will only be from DOE’s ORR, and will only be CERCLA waste.
Melton Valley Test Case
To evaluate long-term stewardship components being examined by SWG, the SSAB focused on Melton Valley (Valley). The Valley includes one operating reactor and two non-operating reactors, and includes contaminated areas, which are primarily solid waste disposal areas. DOE does not know the exact makeup of the waste, as they have received waste from many different sources, but there is potential of the waste surfacing. Currently, three major contaminants are known to be going off-site. DOE is reviewing capping as a remedy, but there is potential for long-term releases.
SWG considered using K-25, where a reindustrialization program is being implemented and private companies are leasing the space, but they decided to focus on Melton Valley.
As a final note, the City strongly encouraged the engagement of retirees (particularly former workers) in the stewardship process as a way to preserve institutional memory.
Hanford, Washington
The 582 square mile Hanford Reservation is located along the Columbia River in southeastern Washington State. Of this area, six percent (6%) is either used or contaminated. The majority of the contamination is located in three areas devoted to plutonium production: the 300 Area produced Uranium fuel rods; the 100 Area irradiated those rods in reactors to generate Plutonium; and the 200 Area separated the Plutonium.
This production generated a full range of radioactive liquids, which then contaminated the soils. Though permanent remedies are preferred during selection process, residual contamination will remain in many spots. For instance, the 200 Area, which will not be transferred, is often referred to as a "sacrifice zone" because a large amount of contamination will remain there after remediation is complete. In such cases, proper implementation of institutional controls will be critical to protecting human health and the environment. The City of Richland would prefer it if regulators, not DOE, decided what institutional controls should be used.
When selecting institutional controls, the future land use of the site should be considered. And the first step in determining future use is a good land use plan. DOE performed an EIS at Hanford that was rejected because of how it looked at land use, so they are now creating a separate land use plan. In a related effort, the Future Uses Working Group (FUWG) was convened and it came up with a land use plan with six alternative land uses and uniform land use designations. Each alternative had a chapter explaining the generic land use policies that would accompany each plan.
During this process, the concerns of Native American tribes have been accommodated whenever possible, but serious differences still remain. For example, the planning maps generated by the local governments on the FUWG allotted 63% of the land for conservation and preservation, while the maps generated by the tribes allotted 90% for conservation. Also, the Native American tribes do not agree with the principle of a sacrifice zone.
A separate working group developed principles for use of institutional controls including: physical controls should be supplemented with administrative; cost projections should include governmental administrative costs; local government must continue property records; and any system should provide for federal, state, local, and tribal institutional memory.
The Benton County Board of Commissioners views DOE as a temporary land holder. Before the Manhattan Project, the property had numerous owners. As a result, local jurisdictions are pressing to assume jurisdiction over the parts of the site as remediation efforts are completed. Benton County currently has some permitting authority over the site, and has a Memorandum of Understanding with DOE regarding shoreline permits.
The 1100 Area, located within the boundaries of the City of Richland, has been transferred. Other parcels have been leased for development, and the Hanford Reach may be transferred soon.
Some of the ideas put forth to safeguard development include: an implementation plan for permitting; project review processes for land use plans; special use permit review would be required for projects that involve institutional controls; coordination with the Site Planning Office for central planning; regular meetings on institutional controls with DOE; a shared database with graphics mapping capabilities (the key tasks would be to define what would go into such a database and what communities want from it).
Other issues include water rights, roads not built to state standards, and transfer of the supply system.
Los Alamos, New Mexico
Los Alamos County, NM ("County") contains ghosts of past, present and future. The town is actually located on the old research site. Every time someone digs they find something interesting. Some of those things were items DOE paid to remove, but apparently never were removed.
Stewardship has a history in Los Alamos: the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) conducted destructive testing in the 1950's in a canyon in Los Alamos after which the AEC enacted controls to keep people from the hazard. Unfortunately, the stewardship has not been kept up.
A landfill on DOE land run by the County municipality must be closed. DOE contractors engaged in some questionable practices, and the municipality now has to deal with the results. Caps may be used to contain contamination at some sites.
Legislation was passed allowing DOE to transfer land to the County, but DOE was slow to move. Subsequent legislation was enacted requiring DOE to transfer land to the County and to the San Ildefonso Pueblo under a specific timetable. The County understands that it may be responsible for long-term stewardship activities on property conveyed to the County.
Further, the County is tracking the cleanup issues at LANL and knows
that there will be significant long-term stewardship activities undertaken
on LANL.
Nye County, Nevada
Nye County, the third largest county in the United States covering 18,064 square miles, is home to both the Nevada Test Site and Yucca Mountain. Certain hazards were cleaned up, but given the enormity of the contamination, the bomb sites will not be remediated. The fallout has migrated, and monitoring will be needed to see if any contamination is migrating off-site.
Nye County just recently came to the table and is still defining the issues of long-term stewardship for themselves. While these sites do provide positive impacts for the County, it should not have to pay for oversight of any problems caused by these places. Yucca Mountain is not yet a problem now, but serious problems could develop if the institutional controls fail. Transportation could also become an issue if the site begins to accept waste.
Discussions on institutional controls involving transfer of waste from one community to another should involve both the sending and receiving communities. Sending communities should also continue to be involved in long-term stewardship activities at receiving sites even after all transfers are complete.
The County feels that local government is the level best suited to administer long-term stewardship activities. This is provided that other levels of government provide local governments with a reliable source of funding. Technical oversight should also be a County function. However, County representatives will need the required funds to hire the technical expertise necessary to work on these issues.
Currently, there is no statutory requirement for local governments to be involved in cleanup decisions. If such a requirement were to be adopted, it should provide for a mechanism to fund the participation of local governments.
A participant noted that Pinellas County, Florida developed an inter-personnel program with DOE to share personnel with regulatory agencies. Under the program DOE pays a portion of an individual’s salary to oversee stewardship activities.
Augusta, Georgia
The Savannah River Site (SRS) will have a continuing mission for the foreseeable future. Despite this, a consistent budget for Environmental Management is needed to protect human health and the environment. Specifically, funding is needed for the In-Tank Precipitation program so that high-level waste can be removed from underground storage tanks and those tanks closed. New facilities will also have to be built for temporary storage of materials.
SRS was awarded the Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel project that assists with the final disposition of Plutonium. MOX fuel is a combination of Plutonium and Uranium that can be used in some commercial nuclear reactors. The project will require proper funding to be successful. Residents are concerned about the transportation of Plutonium and Uranium through their community. DOE is addressing this issue by building a bridge around the city that bypasses much of the developed areas of the community.
St. Charles County, Missouri
A fast growing community in suburban St. Louis, St Charles County is committed to playing a serious role in long-term stewardship. As for the site itself, the Army took title to it during World War II to produce TNT. The Army then gave a small portion to AEC, which they used to process Uranium.
Dealing primarily with low-level radioactive contamination, DOE has been cleaning up the site since the mid-1980's. Some of the contamination has migrated off-site. Extensive remediation efforts have been underway including placing materials in pits, cleaning out a quarry, and exhuming the foundations of all the buildings. Also, a disposal cell and water treatment plant has been built.
Remediation should be complete within three years, but extensive groundwater monitoring will be required far into the future. The County believes that provisions for access to an alternate water supply should be made in case the contamination migrates.
A participant added that the site has a long-term stewardship plan and that the disposal cell is huge and will be the highest point in the County. A pyramid-type structure may be located on the cell to alert people to the hazards below.
The property does not abut any development, but zoning questions have already arisen. The more basic question of who should own the property has not yet been answered.
What are DOE, State and Federal Regulators Doing About Institutional Controls and Long-Term Stewardship?
On the second day of the meeting, representatives from the state of Colorado and DOE addressed their perspective on long-term stewardship and institutional controls.
Steve Tarlton, Rocky Flats Oversight Unit Leader for the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, stated that both institutional controls and stewardship result from remedy selection. Local input, enforceability and knowledge about the cleanup criteria based on land use is needed, he said, in order to provide proper stewardship. "Changes must be consistent with the remedy selection," adding that DOE cannot be an effective "doer" and "regulator". "Somebody needs to do it, and somebody needs to oversee that it gets done." Other long-term issues mentioned were data management (updating, transferring and using the information), and the past, current and future use of nation-wide Records of Decision (RODs).
DOE representatives then discussed the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) which is a study they are undertaking in order to better address the role of local governments in remedy selection.
Last December, DOE settled a lawsuit with the Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (NRDC), which resulted in the creation of several new tools to enhance public understanding of the multi-billion dollar cleanup of the former nuclear weapons complex. Under the terms of the settlement, the Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (ER/WM) Program will develop a PEIS.
According to the PEIS Settlement Lawsuit Database Draft Project Plan, the settlement agreement has three major components:
- DOE will establish a $6.25 million fund to assist citizens’ groups and Tribal Nations in conducting technical and scientific reviews of environmental management activities at DOE sites. The resulting technical reports will be made available to any interested member of the public.
DOE has selected RESOLVE, Inc. as the administering organization for the fund and has transferred management of the initial $1.25 million to RESOLVE, Inc. RESOLVE, Inc. is a Washington, D.C. based non-profit organization specializing in environmental dispute resolution, environmental mediation, consensus building, facilitation, conflict resolution and policy dialogue.
- DOE will prepare and invite public comment
on a study on long-term stewardship.
For more information about the RESOLVE fund, contact Bruce Stedman
at (202) 965-6217.
Wish List
The afternoon session was devoted to discussing the role of local municipalities where property is conveyed or returned by the federal government to non-federal owners, and institutional controls and long-term stewardship where ownership will remain with the Federal government.
The meeting concluded with suggestions from local governments for how DOE and State and Federal regulators should approach the issue of long-term stewardship and institutional controls. Specifically, participants were asked what they need in order to implement, participate in, and support the development of long-term stewardship activities in their community. Participants emphasized defining the roles and responsibilities among levels of government, assessing local government capacity and needs, and identifying more effective institutional controls. One elected local government official said that she would like to see the federal government and regulator agencies match their funds with the number of tasks they pass off to local governments. Another participant added that there is an overall disconnect between community and DOE interests, which impedes any long-term planning. One idea is for ECA to collaborate with state governments and develop a common policy between state and local governments. Other suggestions included: