Risk perception, future land use and stewardship: comparison of attitudes about Hanford Site and Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory

With the ending of the Cold War, the Department of Energy (DOE) is evaluating mission, future land use and stewardship of departmental facilities. This paper compares the environmental concerns and future use preferences of 351 people interviewed at Lewiston, Idaho, about the Hanford Site and Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), two of DOE's largest sites. Although most subjects lived closer to Hanford than INEEL, most resided in the same state as INEEL. Therefore their economic interests might be more closely allied with INEEL, while their health concerns might be more related to Hanford. Few lived close enough to either site to be directly affected economically. We test the null hypotheses that there are no differences in environmental concerns and future land-use preferences as a function of DOE site, sex, age and education. When asked to list their major concerns about the sites, more people listed human health and safety, and environmental concerns about Hanford compared to INEEL. When asked to list their preferred future land uses, 49% of subjects did not have any for INEEL, whereas only 35% did not know for Hanford. The highest preferred land uses for both sites were as a National Environmental Research Park (NERP), and for camping, hunting, hiking, and fishing. Except for returning the land to the tribes and increased nuclear storage, subjects rated all future uses as more preferred at INEEL than Hanford. Taken together, these data suggest that the people interviewed know more about Hanford, are more concerned about Hanford, rate recreational uses and NERP as their highest preferred land use, and feel that INEEL is more suited for most land uses than Handford. Overall rankings for future land uses were remarkably similar between the sites, indicating that for these stakeholders, DOE lands should be preserved for research and recreation. These preferences should be taken into account when planning for long-term stewardship at these two DOE sites.     

Restoration,stewardship, environmental health,and policy: understanding stakeholders' perceptions

In recent years there has been considerable interest in the health of humans and the environment, restoration of contaminated or otherwise degraded lands, and in long-term stewardship of public lands. Unfortunately, it is unclear whether governmental agencies and the public hold similar views about the meanings of these concepts, making policy decisions about restoration and stewardship difficult. In this paper, I explore how the public conceptualizes restoration and stewardship by examining the relative rating of several attributes of restoration, stewardship, environmental health, ecological health, environmental restoration, and ecological restoration. People were interviewed in Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA, near the Department of Energy's Los Alamos National Laboratory. The ratings of attributes of environmental health and ecological health reported in this paper can be used to understand how the public understands these concepts. The attributes rated most highly by the subjects were more similar to definitions in the scientific literature for these terms than they were to those used by the Department of Energy. For environmental health, the highest rating related to human sanitation, while for ecological health the highest rating was for maintaining functioning ecosystems. Reduction of exposure to hazardous substances was rated the second highest for both environmental and ecological health. The wise use of natural resources, preservation of natural resources, and hazardous waste site cleanup were rated the highest attributes of stewardship. These data suggest that both expert and nonexpert perceptions about restoration and stewardship should be incorporated into environmental management decisions.     

Integrating Environmental Restoration and Ecological Restoration: Long-Term Stewardship at the Department of Energy

With the ending of the Cold War, several federal agencies are reclaiming land through remediation and restoration and are considering potential future land uses that are compatible with current uses and local needs. Some sites are sufficiently contaminated that it is likely that the responsible federal agency will retain control over the land for the foreseeable future, providing them with a stewardship mission. This is particularly true of some of the larger Department of Energy (DOE) facilities contaminated during the production of nuclear weapons. The use of the term “restoration” is explored in this paper because the word means different things to the public, ecologists, and environmental managers responsible for contaminated sites, such as Superfund sites and the DOE facilities. While environmental restoration usually refers to remediation and removal of hazardous wastes, ecological restoration refers to the broader process of repairing damaged ecosystems and enhancing their productivity and/or biodiversity. The goals of the two types of restoration can be melded by considering environmental restoration as a special case of ecological restoration, one that involves risk reduction from hazardous wastes, and by broadening environmental restoration to include a more extensive problem-formulation phase (both temporal and spatial), which includes the goal of reestablishing a functioning ecosystem after remediation. Further, evaluating options for the desired post remediation result will inform managers and policy-makers concerning the feasibility and efficacy of environmental restoration itself.     

Defining an ecological baseline for restoration and natural resource damage assessment of contaminated sites: The case of the Department of Energy

Retrospective ecological risk assessment, restoration, natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) and managing ecosystems all require having a baseline. This policy and practice paper explores the factors that influence baseline selection, and it is suggested that ecological resources would best be served by: (1) integrating NRDA considerations into both future land-use planning and remediation/restoration; (2) selecting a baseline for NRDA that approximates the land-use conditions at the time of occupation (or a preferred ecosystem); and (3) integrating both the positive and negative aspects of industrial occupation into restoration decisions, baseline selection and NRDA. Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response and Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), natural resource damages are assessed for injuries incurred since 1980 due to releases, but the release itself may have occurred before 1980. The paper uses the Department of Energy as a case study to examine NRDA and the management of ecosystems. Releases occurred at many DOE sites from the 1950s to the 1980s during nuclear bomb production. It is suggested that the DOE has been responsible not only for injuries to natural resources that occurred as a result of releases, but for significant ecosystem recovery since DOE occupation, because some lands were previously farmed or industrialized. Natural resource injuries due to releases occurred simultaneously with ecosystem recovery that resulted from DOE occupation. While the 1980 date is codified in CERCLA law as the time after which damages can be assessed, baseline can be defined as the conditions the natural resources would have been in today, but for the release of the hazardous substance. It is also suggested that NRDA considerations should be incorporated into the remediation and restoration process at DOE sites, thereby negating the need for formal NRDA following restoration, and reducing the final NRDA costs.     

Integrating long-term stewardship goals into the remediation process: natural resource damages and the Department of Energy

The United States and other developed countries are faced with restoring and managing degraded ecosystems. Evaluations of the degradation of ecological resources can be used for determining ecological risk, making remediation or restoration decisions, aiding stakeholders with future land use decisions, and assessing natural resource damages. Department of Energy (DOE) lands provide a useful case study for examining degradation of ecological resources in light of past or present land uses and natural resource damage assessment (NRDA). We suggest that past site history should be incorporated into the cleanup and restoration phase to reduce the ultimate NRDA costs, and hasten resource recovery. The lands that DOE purchased over 50 years ago ranged from relatively undisturbed to heavily impacted farmland, and the impact that occurred from DOE occupation varies from regeneration of natural ecosystems (benefits) to increased exposure to several stressors (negative effects). During the time of the DOE releases, other changes occurred on the lands, including recovery from the disturbance effects of farming, grazing, and residential occupation, and the cessation of human disturbance. Thus, the injury to natural resources that occurred as a result of chemical and radiological releases occurred on top of recovery of already degraded systems. Both spatial (size and dispersion of patch types) and temporal (past/present/future land use and ecological condition) components are critical aspects of resource evaluation, restoration, and NRDA. For many DOE sites, integrating natural resource restoration with remediation to reduce or eliminate the need for NRDA could be a win-win situation for both responsible parties and natural resource trustees by eliminating costly NRDAs by both sides, and by restoring natural resources to a level that satisfies the trustees, while being cost-effective for the responsible parties. It requires integration of remediation, restoration, and end-state planning to a greater degree than is currently done at most DOE sites.     

Public and occupational risks of the Nevada (USA) Test Site

The Nevada Test Site (NTS), north of Las Vegas, was the scene of hundreds of nuclear weapons tests over four decades, both above- and belowground. There is considerable interest, both in neighboring communities and elsewhere, in the risks it poses. Overall, the greatest risks are nonradioactive in origin, with occupational risks to employees and accident risks in transporting low-level nuclear wastes to the NTS from other Department of Energy (DOE) sites ranking highest. For radiation risks, that to workers handling radioactive materials is much higher than that to the surrounding population, either present or future. Overall, annual risks are small, with all fatalities approximately 0.008% of total Nevada deaths. At the NTS, the government spends about 5000 times more on radiation as opposed to nonradiation deaths. This suggests that at least some resources may be misallocated towards cleanup of public risks and that the occupational risk of cleanup may be much higher than the public risk. Thus risk may be multiplied by well-meaning programs.     

Implications of environmental program planning for siting a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain,Nevada, USA

The US Department of Energy (DOE) plans to conduct site characterization studies at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, to determine if the location is a suitable site for a nuclear waste repository. In lieu of traditional environmental review in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the DOE is relying on an environmental assessment (EA) mandated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 as the cornerstone of its environmental program for the Yucca Mountain Project. Because of statutory restrictions, the EA is not based on comprehensive baseline information. Neither does it address fundamentals of environmental analysis such as ecological integrity and assessment of cumulative impacts. Consequently, the present environmental program for Yucca Mountain reflects decisions made without complete information and integrated environmental review. The shortcomings of the program risk compromising the natural integrity of Yucca Mountain and invalidating future assessment of the ability of a nuclear waste repository located at the site to protect the environment. Significant improvements are needed in the repository siting program before it can serve as a model of how society can evaluate the long-term environmental consequences of advanced technologies, as has been suggested.     

“Just Another Hoop to Jump Through?” Using Environmental Laws and Processes to Protect Indigenous Rights

Protection of culturally important indigenous landscapes has become an increasingly important component of environmental management processes, for both companies and individuals striving to comply with environmental regulations, and for indigenous groups seeking stronger laws to support site protection and cultural/human rights. Given that indigenous stewardship of culturally important sites, species, and practices continues to be threatened or prohibited on lands out of indigenous ownership, this paper examines whether or not indigenous people can meaningfully apply mainstream environmental management laws and processes to achieve protection of traditional sites and associated stewardship activities. While environmental laws can provide a “back door” to protect traditional sites and practices, they are not made for this purpose, and, as such, require specific amendments to become more useful for indigenous practitioners. Acknowledging thoughtful critiques of the cultural incommensurability of environmental law with indigenous environmental stewardship of sacred sites, I interrogate the ability of four specific environmental laws and processes—the Uniform Conservation Easement Act; the National Environmental Policy Act and the California Environmental Quality Act; the Pacific Stewardship Council land divestiture process; and Senate Bill 18 (CA-2004)—to protect culturally important landscapes and practices. I offer suggestions for improving these laws and processes to make them more applicable to indigenous stewardship of traditional landscapes.     

Local impacts of US nuclear weapons facilities: a survey of planners

This research examines the perceptions of planners in communities around the largest US Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear weapons sites. Surveys and interviews revealed that planners are often unclear about DOE intentions, concerned about jobs and environmental contamination, and desire more involvement with future site use decisions. Planners' ratings of residents' trust of the DOE were also low, and low trust was most strongly associated with places where local officials have not been invited to future use meetings. Recommendations include improving coordination of on-site planning with local land use plans and increasing trust with a Federal-local government partnership that recognizes local concerns about the clean-up, closure and disposition of the sites.     

Environmental cleanup: The challenge at the Hanford Site,Washington, USA

Numerous challenges face those involved with developing a coordinated and consistent approach to cleaning up the US Department of Energy’s (DOE) Hanford Site in southeastern Washington. These challenges are much greater than those encountered when the site was selected and the world’s first nuclear complex was developed almost 50 years ago. This article reviews Hanford’s history, operations, waste storage/disposal activities, environmental monitoring, and today’s approach to characterize and clean up Hanford under a Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, signed by DOE, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Washington Sate Department of Ecology. Although cleanup of defense-related waste at Hanford holds many positive benefits, negative features include high costs to the US taxpayer, numerous uncertainties concerning the technologies to be employed and the risks involved, and the high probability that special interest groups and activists at large will never be completely satisfied. Issues concerning future use of the site, whether to protect and preserve its natural features or open it to public exploitation, remain to be resolved.     

Preferences for alternative risk management policies at the United States major nuclear weapons legacy sites

A survey of 1351 people who lived within 50 miles of one of six US Department of Energy nuclear weapon sites showed that the vast majority of residents prefer strong public health surveillance and land use controls. The sample was stratified so that the same number of responses was obtained at each site. The strongest correlates of wanting the DOE to restrict on-site activities and maintain and expand its surveillance programs were worries about DOE activities on the site, as well as how those activities could damage the off-site environment. Notably, the exceptions, that is, those who demanded less from the DOE and were not particularly worried about the DOE's activities, tended to live near the site, many worked there or knew people who did, and had high socio-economic status, and trusted the DOE. The findings are mostly, but not entirely, consistent with expectations drawn from the risk perception and organizational trust literatures. The challenge is how to establish a stewardship program that represents a consensus among state and local government, community advisory boards and the public that remediation can go on at the same time that some waste is managed on-site until suitable technologies can be safely deployed, which at some sites means 100 years or in perpetuity.     

A new approach to propellant formulation: minimizing life-cycle costs through science-based design

The traditional approach to developing propellants for specific gun applications relies heavily on trial and error. Candidate formulations must be made in small quantities and subjected to burning-rate measurements and small-scale vulnerability assessments. If the properties of these candidates fail to meet expectations, the process must be repeated. This approach, while historically unavoidable, is obviously inefficient in time and expense, but it also can generate considerable waste streams associated with unsuccessful formulations. With added considerations of life-cycle costs including environmental impact at all stages of development, use, and disposal, this traditional approach becomes increasingly unworkable. In this report a new approach is proposed which makes maximal use of scientific understanding embodied in models during the early phases of the propellant-development cycle. Through simple simulations, it is shown that this strategy can have a significant impact on the overall costs of the development process. In analogy to the DOE program to convert the nuclear-weapon stewardship from testing-based to science-based, we term the new approach "science-based design." It is argued that the modeling contribution to the propellant-development process is most efficiently implemented by subjecting candidate formulations to a hierarchy of models of different sophistication and input-data requirements, reserving the most rigorous models (usually the most data-intensive and least robust) for the most promising candidates. This new approach will require concentration and leveraging of resources toward the most critical early-phase development steps, but it may be the only credible strategy to reconcile the need for higher-performance weapons with the reality of declining resources.     

Introduction to the Biological Monitoring and Abatement Program

This paper provides an introduction to a long-term biological monitoring program and the Environmental Management special issue titled Long-term Biological Monitoring of an Impaired Stream: Implications for Environmental Management. The Biological Monitoring and Abatement Program, or BMAP, was implemented to assess biological impairment downstream of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, beginning in 1985. Several of the unique aspects of the program include its long-term consistent sampling, a focus on evaluating the effectiveness of specific facility abatement and remedial actions, and the use of quantitative sampling protocols using a multidisciplinary approach. This paper describes the need and importance of long-term watershed-based biological monitoring strategies, in particular for addressing long-term stewardship goals at DOE sites, and provides a summary of the BMAP’s objectives, spatial and temporal extent, and overall focus. The primary components of the biological monitoring program for East Fork Poplar Creek in Oak Ridge, Tennessee are introduced, as are the additional 9 papers in this Environmental Management special issue.     

Basic principles and ecological consequences of changing water regimes on nitrogen cycling in fluvial systems

Understanding the environmental consequences of changing water regimes is a daunting challenge for both resource managers and ecologists. Balancing human demands for fresh water with the needs of the environment for water in appropriate amounts and at the appropriate times are shaping the ways by which this natural resource will be used in the future. Based on past decisions that have rendered many freshwater resources unsuitable for use, we argue that river systems have a fundamental need for appropriate amounts and timing of water to maintain their biophysical integrity. Biophysical integrity is fundamental for the formulation of future sustainable management strategies. This article addresses three basic ecological principles driving the biogeochemical cycle of nitrogen in river systems. These are (1) how the mode of nitrogen delivery affects river ecosystem functioning, (2) how increasing contact between water and soil or sediment increases nitrogen retention and processing, and (3) the role of floods and droughts as important natural events that strongly influence pathways of nitrogen cycling in fluvial systems. New challenges related to the cumulative impact of water regime change, the scale of appraisal of these impacts, and the determination of the impacts due to natural and human changes are discussed. It is suggested that cost of long-term and long-distance cumulative impacts of hydrological changes should be evaluated against short-term economic benefits to determine the real environmental costs.     

Optimal Environmental Management Strategy and Implementation for Groundwater Contamination Prevention and Restoration

An innovative management strategy is proposed for optimized and integrated environmental management for regional or national groundwater contamination prevention and restoration allied with consideration of sustainable development. This management strategy accounts for availability of limited resources, human health and ecological risks from groundwater contamination, costs for groundwater protection measures, beneficial uses and values from groundwater protection, and sustainable development. Six different categories of costs are identified with regard to groundwater prevention and restoration. In addition, different environmental impacts from groundwater contamination including human health and ecological risks are individually taken into account. System optimization principles are implemented to accomplish decision-makings on the optimal resources allocations of the available resources or budgets to different existing contaminated sites and projected contamination sites for a maximal risk reduction. Established management constraints such as budget limitations under different categories of costs are satisfied at the optimal solution. A stepwise optimization process is proposed in which the first step is to select optimally a limited number of sites where remediation or prevention measures will be taken, from all the existing contaminated and projected contamination sites, based on a total regionally or nationally available budget in a certain time frame such as 10 years. Then, several optimization steps determined year-by-year optimal distributions of the available yearly budgets for those selected sites. A hypothetical case study is presented to demonstrate a practical implementation of the management strategy. Several issues pertaining to groundwater contamination exposure and risk assessments and remediation cost evaluations are briefly discussed for adequately understanding implementations of the management strategy.     

Recreational Rates and Future Land Use Preferences for Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Facility

To manage ecosystems it is essential to understand physical properties and biological function, as well as the ecological services and social/cultural perceptions of a variety of stakeholders. Where land managers are required to make decisions about restoration, remediation and future land use, understanding attitudes and future land use preferences is essential. In this paper I synthesize data on five surveys of recreational rates and preferences for future land use for the Department of Energy's Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). Subjects were interviewed at several well-attended events at different distances from INEEL, representing local and regional views. Between 24 and 59% of the subjects hunted, between 55 and 71% fished, and up to 87% camped, indicating potential for exposure if INEEL were open for recreation. Average recreational rates varied by location, with the Shoshone-Bannock Indians having higher hunting, fishing, hiking and camping rates than all others. There were significant differences in future land use preferences; subjects living close to the site rated nuclear material processing very high, while those living farther away ranked it intermediate. Indians ranked this use the lowest. Using the land as a National Environmental Research Park (NERP) was rated the highest (or nearly the highest) for all groups. Industrial uses were generally rated low by all groups. These data can be used by local planners and policy makers in decision making regarding levels of clean-up, future land use, future end-states and long-term protection and stewardship of these contaminated lands. The relative unanimity in future land use preferences for NERP and recreation, rather than new industrial purposes, provides guidance for remediation, suggesting that residential clean-up standards may be more stringent than required. Further, the relative approval of continued nuclear reprocessing (but not nuclear storage) also provides guidance for risk-based end-state planning.     

Changing the Culture of Underdevelopment and Unsustainability

Complex relationships exist between human nature and needs, cultural evolution and ecological dynamics. The purpose of this paper is to present a working hypothesis that explores how we may reverse worsening underdevelopment, poverty and unsustainability trends world-wide. Empirical evidence from cultural history and contemporary project experience are used to suggest a development process that combines three critical dimensions: ethics, productive social interaction and knowledge integration. Logic dictates that the process should be applied in any given country to mobilize investment in supplies of natural, human and economic capital, principally biodiversity, soil and water conservation, education and public health. A sociopolitical theory of underdevelopment is presented to suggest that unethical virtual cartels control social interaction, knowledge integration and resource mobilization, precipitating negative feedback effects on human development, ecological stability and, ultimately, cultural evolution. The hypothesis was formulated using observations over 5 years in Mexico and case-study experience to initiate an alternative process of water resource conservation.     

Achieving competitive advantage through product stewardship and LCA

Companies have achieved competitive advantage by expanding the boundaries of their concern beyond the product life-cycle stage that they directly control. By using product stewardship and life-cycle information, coupled with business analysis, companies can successfully outperform their competitors by improving their product or product system by reducing costs, increasing revenue, reducing liabilities, and enhancing their image. Life-cycle information and its use within a product stewardship management framework goes beyond traditional life-cycle applications. Used wisely, it can help companies establish a sustainable framework for long-term success.     

Science-Policy Interactions in MPA Site Selection in the Dutch Part of the North Sea

At the 7th conference of the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD-COP7, Kuala Lumpur, 2004) it was agreed to establish a global network of marine and coastal protected areas by 2012. The defined objectives of this MPA-network are based on the ecosystem approach: to protect biodiversity and other ecological values, and to ensure sustainable use. The (inter)national policy guidelines state that the selection of MPAs should be based on scientific information and ecological criteria only. As a signatory to the Convention, the Netherlands is now faced with meeting this obligation, and the process of designating the first Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in the Dutch part of the North Sea is currently in progress. We focus on the science–policy interactions that are part of this Dutch MPA selection process. By taking a closer look at the contemporary site selection process as well as its historical background, we show that ecological, socio-economic and political considerations cannot always be easily separated. Uncertainty is high and the ultimate selection and delimitation of candidate sites rather seems to be the result of a balancing act between ecological, socio-economic and political interests, in which scientific and policy guiding procedures blend with ad-hoc political decision making, and with expert judgment in cases where data is lacking. As such, this paper presents an example of present-day environmental policy making in action.