DOE's Information Resource Center holds the administrative records for all CERCLA actions on the Oak Ridge Reservation. IRC staffers maintain records, provide copies of documents, and help the public, TDEC's DOE Oversight Division and DOE (sub)contractors find information about the environmental condition of the ORR, including the status and results of cleanup actions.

In December 1998, the contract to manage the IRC was awarded to Turner, Harper and Associates by M&I contractor Bechtel Jacobs Company. The value of this competitively bid contract? $160,000 for one year.

Since then, staffing has been slashed. Four of five full-time experienced professionals in archival work, abstracting and information management were replaced by two-and-a-half-time low-salaried, entry-level, untrained workers. The one original worker who stayed suffered a 35 percent cut in salary and reduced benefits -- and assumed additional responsibilities on top of her old job.

Not surprisingly, the greater Oak Ridge community is seeing cutbacks in services at the IRC. The new employees are unfamiliar with the system they are now charged with maintaining. Abstracting has been ended. And opportunities to use the facility for evening meetings are restricted, as there are no provisions to pay overtime.

The IRC is supposed to serve the needs of the overall community, and its ability to continue to do so has been hurt dramatically.

Although the IRC contract is now managed by Bechtel Jacobs, DOE is ultimately responsible for ensuring that environmental management information is readily available to its stakeholders. In its fervor to save money, Bechtel Jacobs is tarnishing the primary walk-in relationship between DOE and its stakeholders. Best value, not lowest cost, should have been the selection approach used for this procurement. "Best value" could have been determined in part by asking the users of the IRC -- the stakeholders -- what they expected.

Unfortunately, this tale of woe at the IRC is not an isolated case. Instead, it is typical of what is happening among contracts not covered by worker transition agreements. Low-paying jobs with limited benefits replace those with high salaries and good benefits. There are fewer replacement jobs than there had been original jobs, and an undisclosed number of employees quietly "fall off the table" during these changes. This latter situation is typical even when worker transition agreements are in place.

These changeovers fuel the economic distress and personal misfortunes that have typified the bleeding away of DOE's Environmental Management budget. Bechtel Jacobs promised to create jobs for the community -- in this case, they are negative one and a half.

Looking for a better way

Fall forum highlights monitored natural attenuation

By Norman Mulvenon

The National Stakeholders' Forum on Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) was held in San Francisco from Aug. 30 to Sept. 1, 1998. The forum was designed to help community stakeholders become familiar with the science of natural attenuation and discuss how to influence regulatory policies. It was organized by the Center for Public Environmental Oversight (CPEO) located in San Francisco and was sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Army. The attendance was about 300 and included stakeholders, agencies, and regulators. The stakeholders came from a broad cross-section of sites, including Department of Defense, Department of Energy, and private industry.

What is natural attenuation? The EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response offers the following definition:

"The biodegradation, dispersion, dilution, sorption, volatilization, and/or chemical and biochemical stabilization of contaminants to reduce contaminant toxicity, mobility, or volume effectively to levels that are protective of human health and the ecosystem."

The first day of the three-day forum was billed as "How can Local Community Members Influence National Policy?" The remaining two days of the forum were an intense combination of technical presentations and stakeholder opinion.

The technical presentations covered an introduction to hazardous waste contamination, the natural attenuation of contaminants, and source remediation and monitoring technologies.

The final session on Regulator & Community Response included a talk on EPA's Draft Monitored Natural Attenuation Policy by Ken Lovelace of EPA Headquarters. He stressed three points regarding MNA:

It is an alternative to other cleanup methods.
It must attain cleanup objectives appropriate for site.
It can be selected if site data shows that:
Natural processes will attain site cleanup objectives.
Time period required is reasonable when compared to other methods.

Stakeholder comments and dialogues ranged from complete agreement that MNA is an acceptable remedial action to abject horror that anyone would even consider such an action. The latter came mostly in relation to commercial sites, and the petroleum industry in particular.

There were two breakout sessions that revolved around four questions proposed by Lenny Siegel of CPEO:

What are the advantages and disadvantages of MNA as a remedy?
When and where is MNA appropriate?
How does one predict and verify the effectiveness of MNA?
What should be done if MNA does not work as anticipated?

The general opinion was that MNA is a viable remedy that may be used after careful site characterization. Monitoring systems should be designed specifically for MNA, and monitoring criteria selected with care. Finally, there should be an active remedy as backup if MNA does not work.

There was an overwhelming amount of technical information at this forum and this report only touches on the issues. If you are interested in any particular aspect of MNA, all of the technical material from the conference is on file at the LOC office for easy reference. The LOC has also ordered a copy of "Natural Attenuation -- CERCLA, RBCA's, and the Future of Environmental Remediation" by Patrick V. Brady, Michael V. Brady, and David J. Borns for reference by interested stakeholders.

CPEO introduced a new page on their Web site titled Technology Tree. It is designed to give basic information to the stakeholder by using contaminant, media, and technology type as input, in order to arrive at suggested remediation technologies. The CPEO Web site is located at www.cpeo.org.

(Norman Mulvenon is the new chair of the CAP.)

Interstate work group focuses on new technology

By Elaine Spect

Before site owners can put their plans for site cleanup into action, the technologies they propose must be permitted by, or receive a seal of approval from, the authorized regulatory agency.

Permit writers, representing regulatory agencies whose mission is to safeguard public health and the environment, review cleanup plans and examine test results. When state regulators understand how a technology works -- and when they have confidence that site owners and consultants have supplied test data to meet their states' data requirements -- they are more likely to support the use of new environmental technologies.

The Interstate Technology and Regulatory Cooperation (ITRC) Work Group is an organization of state regulators, technology users, stakeholders, and others. Its mission is to give state regulators the tools and understanding they need to decide if a given innovative technology is appropriate for cleaning up a particular site. ITRC endorses the use of innovative technologies at sites where such technologies will do a better job of protecting human health and the environment and are more cost-effective than conventional approaches.

ITRC helps to raise the comfort level of regulators and other affected parties regarding new technologies. It does this by producing technical/regulatory guidance documents that specify a uniform set of data requirements to be met by various classes of environmental technologies. ITRC then encourages state regulators to use the guidance documents when they evaluate technologies that have been proposed for cleanup projects. When states adopt these guidelines, the permitting process becomes more efficient, and vendors and consultants working with innovative technologies avoid the time and expense of meeting a different set of permitting requirements in each state.

ITRC also reaches out to regulators with a series of training workshops on natural attenuation of chlorinated solvents in ground water. (See related story on monitored natural attenuation.)

LOC Executive Director Susan Gawarecki and CAP member Norman Mulvenon attended an ITRC workshop on natural attenuation of chlorinated solvents in groundwater held in Nashville last November. Dr. Gawarecki, representing stakeholder interests, is also participating on the ITRC DNAPLs work team and will be reviewing the results of the Radionuclides work team.

Through their participation in ITRC, regulators and stakeholders are becoming technology advocates. And, as more states participate and receive benefit from ITRC products, the regulatory climate will become more open and accepting of improved cleanup technologies that are more protective of human health and the environment.

ITRC posts its guidance documents on the Web at www.itrcweb.org. Look there to find technology overviews, case studies and technical/regulatory guidance on accelerated site characterization, in situ bioremediation, metals in soils, permeable barrier walls, plasma technologies, policy, and thermal desorption.

ITRC forms work teams to produce its guidance documents. Work teams include regulators, technology vendors, site owners, and community stakeholders. Two of ITRC's current technical work teams are looking for another community stakeholder. If you would like to find out more about participating on either the Phytoremediation or the In Situ Chemical Oxidation teams, e-mail either Ann Callison at awbarbour@aol.com or Aimee Houghton at aimeeh@cpeo.org.

(Elaine Spect is with the Waste Policy Institute.)

Oak Ridge: What do you think you see?

Susan Arnold Kaplan

Financial calamity, business-as-usual, or thriving new endeavors? Company town-like community reliant on government funding, economically depressed bedroom community, thriving retirement center, or entrepreneurial and high-technology business hub?

Depending on one's perspective, there are many different views of the future of Oak Ridge. What's the truth? Who can you believe? Deciding what to believe and the course of action to take now faces -- or should be facing -- most Oak Ridgers.

At the risk of being labeled "Chicken Little" as Chair of the Economic Transition Committee, for some time I have taken the stance that Oak Ridge faces great financial peril if we do not change its current direction. However, it also is my belief that we have little to lose by acknowledging the worst-case scenario as a real possibility and doing our best to prevent it from occurring.

To help change the direction we are headed -- and mitigate the impact of budget cuts and unfavorable media coverage -- my committee has made several recommendations to the community. These recommendations have taken the form of two CAP resolutions, one adopted in December of last year (R97097) and the second adopted this December (R98162). While some of the recommendations may be questioned by those who believe the current economic climate is simply business-as-usual and that renewed prosperity is just a few funding cycles away, they are intended to acknowledge and head off the worst-case scenario that we envision.

Such acknowledgment and, more importantly, decisive action are required if we are to have the luxury of returning to any semblance of "business-as-usual" in the future.

(Susan Kaplan chairs the CAP's Economic Issues Subcommittee.)

Hot Flashes

TDEC annual report

The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) Department of Energy Oversight Division Status Report to the Public is now available. Formed as the State's lead agency for implementing the Tennessee Oversight Agreement, the DOE Oversight Division assures DOE's compliance with applicable regulations, monitors the environment, and reviews remediation projects. The document provides a readable source of information about how the State's obligation is being met, gives the status of DOE's current waste management efforts, and describes how contaminated sites and buildings are addressed. This free document can be obtained at the LOC and TDEC offices or viewed on the TDEC Web site.

Join the CAP

Help make a difference in your community! The Citizens' Advisory Panel is now accepting applications for new members. Several positions are currently open, and others will become open for the regular term beginning July 1. The CAP invites all interested members of the public to apply. A technical background is not required, but a willingness to devote at least six hours a month to LOC work is necessary.

Listservers: The good news

E-mail listservers are a great way to exchange information and opinions with a large group of people sharing similar interests. Two servers relevant to nuclear issues are RadWaste and RadSafe. To join RADWASTE, send the following e-mail message to LISTSERV@ROMULUS.EHS. UIUC.EDU: SUBSCRIBE RADWASTE YourFirstName YourLastName. To join RADSAFE send the message: SUBSCRIBE RADSAFE YourFirstName YourLastName to the same address. The automated list will send back instructions. Digest versions are also available, if you prefer a few long messages to many short messages.

Listservers: The bad news

Due to lack of usage, the low-level waste listserver sponsored by the LOC is being shut down.

CAP elects new chair

At the March meeting, the CAP elected Norman Mulvenon as its new Chair. Susan Kaplan retained the Vice Chair position. Many thanks to Steve Kopp, outgoing Chair, for his years of service.

LOC awards contract for white papers

Based on recommendations by an outside selection committee, James Alexander of Oak Ridge has been awarded the contract to produce two white papers for the LOC. The topics approved by the Board are: (1) Summary of Oak Ridge Waste Equity Issues; and (2) Compilation of Existing Information Documenting Off-site Discharges and Risks to Area Populations across the DOE Complex, with Emphasis on Impacts from the Oak Ridge Reservation. Look for these papers to be available this summer.

CAP members at ECA

Executive Director Susan Gawarecki was joined by CAP members Norman Mulvenon, Susan Kaplan, and Josh Johnson at the Energy Communities Alliance Conference March 4-5 in Washington, D.C. The LOC contingent took the opportunity to visit decision-makers on Capitol Hill and at DOE Headquarters. A report on this trip will be published in the next issue of Insights.

Alphabet Soup

(Initials and acronyms to make this newsletter and other DOE-related documents easier to read)

ATSDR = Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
CAP = Citizen's Advisory Panel
CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (also known as "Superfund")
CPEO = Center for Public Environmental Oversight
CROET = Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee
DNAPLs = Dense Non-aqueous Phase Liquids
DOE = Department of Energy
EIS = Environmental Impact Statement
EM = Environmental Management
EPA = Environmental Protection Agency
EQAB = City of Oak Ridge Environmental Quality Advisory Board
IRC = Information Resource Center
ITRC = Interstate Technology and Regulatory Cooperation
LLW = low-level waste
LOC = Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee, Inc.
M&I = Management and Integrating
MNA = Monitored Natural Attenuation
ORR = Oak Ridge Reservation
RBCA = Risk-Based Corrective Action
RCERB = Roane County Environmental Review Board
SSAB = Oak Ridge Reservation Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board
TDEC = Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation