The dynamic nature of risk in DOE facilities in the surveillance and maintenance program-with observations for risk communications.

We explore three case studies of facilities at two US Department of Energy (DOE) former nuclear weapons research and production sites-the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Hanford site-whose risk profiles have changed during their long-term management under the DOE's surveillance and maintenance (S&M) program. These case studies provide examples of the challenges faced in communicating to external stakeholders, such as federal and state regulators, local communities surrounding the site, as well as the general public, the circumstances surrounding unexpected events or the emergence/discovery of new risk-important information at historically high-risk sites. We identify common topics of importance from these case studies and suggest a taxonomy for risk communicators to use in informing the dialogues with individuals and organizations that may not be technically oriented or fully informed on the subject matter. The taxonomy is based on technical insights from the quintessential definition of risk known as the Kaplan-Garrick "risk triplet" as well as insights from regulatory guidance documents on risk communication with external stakeholders originally developed for the commercial nuclear power industry.

The costs of delaying remediation on human, ecological, and eco-cultural resources: Considerations for the Department of Energy: A methodological framework.

Remediation and restoration of the Nation's nuclear legacy of radiological and chemical contaminated areas is an ongoing and costly challenge for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). For large sites, such as the Hanford and Savannah River Sites, successful remediation involves complex decisions related to remedies, end-states, timing, and sequencing of cleanup of separate and related contaminated units within a site. Hanford Site cannot clean up every unit simultaneously due to limits in funding, personnel, and technology. This paper addresses one of the major considerations - the consequences of delaying remediation of a unit on different receptors (e.g. people, ecological, and eco-cultural resources), using the DOE Hanford Site as a case study. We develop a list of attributes that managers should consider for successful remediation, examine how delaying remediation could affect workers, the public and ecological resources (including water resources), and use some examples to illustrate potential effects of delays. The factors to consider when deciding whether and how long to delay remediation of a unit include personnel, information and data, funding, equipment, structural integrity, contaminant source, and resource vulnerability. Each of these factors affects receptors differently. Any remediation task may be dependent on other remediation projects, on the availability of transport, containers, interim storage and ultimate disposition decisions, or the availability of trained personnel. Delaying remediation may have consequences for people (e.g. workers, site neighbors), plants, animals, ecosystems, and eco-cultural resources (i.e. those cultural values that depend upon ecological resources). The risks, benefits, and uncertainties for evaluating the consequences of delaying remediation are described and discussed. Assessing the advantages and disadvantages of delaying remediation is important for health professionals, ecologists, resource trustees, regulators, Tribal members, recreationists, fishermen, hunters, conservationists, and a wide range of other stakeholders.

Conceptual site models as a tool in evaluating ecological health: the case of the Department of Energy's Amchitka Island nuclear test site.

Managers of contaminated sites are faced with options ranging from monitoring natural attenuation to complete removal of contaminants to meet residential health standards. Conceptual site models (CSMs) are one tool used by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and other environmental managers to understand, track, help with decisions, and communicate with the public about the risk from contamination. CSMs are simplified graphical representations of the sources, releases, transport and exposure pathways, and receptors, along with possible barriers to interdict pathways and reduce exposure. In this article, three CSMs are created using Amchitka Island, where the remaining contamination is from underground nuclear test shot cavities containing large quantities of numerous radionuclides in various physical and chemical forms: (1) a typical underground nuclear test shot CSM (modeled after other sites), (2) an expanded CSM with more complex receptors, and (3) a regional CSM that takes into account contaminant pathways from sources other than Amchitka. The objective was to expand the CSM used by DOE to be more responsive to different types of receptors. Amchitka Island differs from other DOE test shot sites because it is surrounded by a marine environment that is highly productive and has a high biodiversity, and the source of contamination is underground, not on the surface. The surrounding waters of the Bering Sea and North Pacific Ocean are heavily exploited by commercial fisheries and provide the United States and other countries with a significant proportion of its seafood. It is proposed that the CSMs on Amchitka Island should focus more on the pathways of exposure and critical receptors, rather than sources and blocks. Further, CSMs should be incorporated within a larger regional model because of the potentially rapid transport within ocean ecosystems. The large number of migratory or highly mobile species that pass by Amchitka provide the potential for a direct pathway to the local human population, known as Aleut, and commercial fisheries, which are remote from the island itself. The exposure matrix for receptors requires expansion for the Amchitka Island ecosystem because of the valuable marine and seafood resources in the region. CSMs with an expanded exposure/receptor matrix can be used effectively to clarify the conceptualization of the problem for scientists, regulators, and the general public.

Using integrated geospatial mapping and conceptual site models to guide risk-based environmental clean-up decisions.

Government and private sector organizations are increasingly turning to the use of maps and other visual models to provide a depiction of environmental hazards and the potential risks they represent to humans and ecosystems. Frequently, the graphic presentation is tailored to address a specific contaminant, its location and possible exposure pathways, and potential receptors. Its format is usually driven by the data available, choice of graphics technology, and the audience being served. A format that is effective for displaying one contaminant at one scale at one site, however, may be ineffective in accurately portraying the circumstances surrounding a different contaminant at the same site, or the same contaminant at a different site, because of limitations in available data or the graphics technology being used. This is the daunting challenge facing the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), which is responsible for the nation's legacy wastes from nuclear weapons research, testing, and production at over 100 sites in the United States. In this article, we discuss the development and use of integrated geospatial mapping and conceptual site models to identify hazards and evaluate alternative long-term environmental clean-up strategies at DOE sites located across the United States. While the DOE probably has the greatest need for such information, the Department of Defense and other public and private responsible parties for many large and controversial National Priority List or Superfund sites would benefit from a similar approach.