Stakeholder Efforts Earn Anacostia
An Urban River Pilot Project
On April 21, 2003, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers announced the selection of the Anacostia River as the first of eight urban
river restoration pilot projects under the Urban Rivers Restoration Initiative. Through a com-
petitive process, reviewers selected the Anacostia project based on its comprehensive restoration plan,
which includes restoring neighboring wetlands, expanding forest coverage, redeveloping underused
brownfields properties along the banks, and expanding public and stakeholder involvement.
The Anacostia, which flows through the District of Columbia and Maryland, is often referred to as
the region's "Forgotten River." While not as well-known as the Potomac, it was never forgotten by the
members of the Anacostia Watershed Toxics Alliance (AWTA), who have quietly worked to improve
the river's prognosis since 1999.
From the Director
w;
FromtheDireCtOr • M Welcome to our 8th edition of Partners in Progress (PIP). This issue marks
the debut of several firsts for the newsletter. Beginning with this issue,
PIP will be available via online distribution in addition to the printed
newsletter. This will allow us to save valuable resources as well as help streamline
delivery. When each issue is published, subscribers will receive an e-mail message
that contains highlights of the new PIP and links to the online document. For
those who prefer the paper edition, printed copies will remain available.

OSWER Assistant Administrator Marianne Lament Horinko has announced
five major initiatives, including the Resource Conservation Challenge (RCC). In support of the
RCC initiative, we are bringing you Fanners in Progress in a more environmentally-friendly,
efficient way.

By coincidence, two articles in this issue focus on the two "Rockies," as we call them. No, we are
not talking about Colorado's Major League Baseball team, but about two major federal facility sites!
the Department of Energy's (DOE) Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site and the Army's
Rocky Mountain Arsenal.

The Rocky Flats article represents the first installment of a new PIP feature—the "RPM's Corner."
We will use this space to explore the technical side of federal facilities restoration, with an eye toward
providing particularly useful information for remedial project managers (RPMs). In this inaugural
installment of the RPM's Corner, we examine the technology that has helped to accelerate and
improve the cleanup of Rocky Flats, a DOE site near Denver, Colorado that manufactured nuclear
weapons components for nearly 40 years. By embracing new technology, the Rocky Flats cleanup is
now ahead of schedule. By 2006, we anticipate that the bulk of the 6,500 acre site will be transferred

Federal Cleanups That Put Citizens First

-------
From the Director

to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for use as a wildlife
refuge, while another portion will be used to complete a
beltway around Denver.

Community involvement has played a key role at Rocky
Mountain Arsenal in Colorado, also profiled in this issue. As
with nearby Rocky Flats, much of the former Army installa-
tion's acreage will be converted to a wildlife refuge. However,
the 940-acre Western Tier of the property is scheduled to be
transferred to neighboring Commerce City for redevelop-
ment. When the Western Tier was originally scheduled to be
deleted from the National Priority List (NPL), the communi-
ty intervened to request additional soil testing at the site. In
response to community concerns, EPA worked with the
Colorado Department of Public Health to conduct addition-
al tests on the Western Tier. Based on the results, which
confirmed that the parcel was safe for its intended reuse, the
property was deleted from the NPL on January 21, 2003.

Whether on paper or online, PIP continues to relate the
key happenings within EPAs Federal Facility cleanup pro-
gram and report on accomplishments and activities with its
many partners. A prime example of such partnerships pay-
ing environmental benefits is the formation of the Anacostia
Watershed Toxics Alliance (AWTA), a group of public and
private partners, including EPA, who have combined efforts
to clean up Washington, DCs Anacostia River. AWTAs
efforts recently contributed to the selection of the Anacostia
by EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as one of
eight urban river restoration pilot programs. You can read
more about the Anacostia's selection on page 1.
Finally, this issue highlights the deserving winners of the
2002 Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Notable
Achievement Awards for Federal Facilities. The awards recog-
nized the achievements of Region 5's Fernald Team and
Region 9's John Chesnutt. The Fernald Team was responsible
for overseeing the cleanup of the Fernald Superfund site—a
former DOE site near Cincinnati, Ohio which formerly
refined uranium for defense purposes. Faced with the chal-
lenge of remediating a site with extensive uranium and
radium contamination, the Fernald Team strengthened the
relationship between EPA and the Ohio EPA, and reached
out to the surrounding community to put the cleanup an esti-
mated 4 years ahead of schedule. John Chesnutt was
recognized for his efforts as the RPM at Fort Ord, an NPL
site near Monterey, California. John arranged significant out-
reach programs to promote understanding in the community
prior to signing of the Interim Action Record of Decision
(ROD) at the former military base and took a leadership role
in addressing issues surrounding clearance.

Fundamental keys to success in federal facilities restora-
tion—at Rocky Flats, Rocky Mountain Arsenal, Fernald,
Anacostia, Fort Ord, and around the country—have been
stakeholder involvement and cooperation among agencies,
individuals, and communities. With that always in mind,
we welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions.
For more information, visit us on the Web at . If you would like to receive PIP electronical-
ly, please let us know by sending an email to
. Please be sure to let us know if
you wish to continue to receive the printed version, the
electronic version, or both by sending in the attached
response card. E3

—James Woolford, FFRRO Director
Acronyms Explained
AWTA Anacostia Watershed Toxics Alliance
CAB Citizens Advisory Board
DoD U.S. Department of Defense
DOE U.S. Department of Energy
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ESD Explanation of Significant Differences
FFRRO Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office
FOST Findings of Suitability for Transfer
FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
MAS National Academies of Science
NPL National Priorities List
OSC On-Scene Coordinator
OSHA Occupational Health and Safety Administration
RMA Rocky Mountain Arsenal
ROD Record of Decision
RPM Remedial Project Manager
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
TIO Technology Information Office
TSP Technical Support Project
UXO Unexploded Ordnance
Partners In Progress

Philosophy
Stakeholders involved in federal facility cleanups are
diverse, with differing backgrounds, interests, and
perspectives. All of these stakeholders, however, share
a single common goal—progress. Partners in Prog
(PIP) provides a forum for stakeholders to exchange
information, offer solutions, and share stories about
what works and what doesn't. We encourage you—
our readers—to write to us about your activities that
foster teamwork, promote innovation, and strengthen
community involvement. Only by working together
can we achieve our goal of "federal cleanups that put
citizens first."
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
(5106G)
November 2003
www.epa.gov/swerffrr/

-------
Stakeholder  Efforts

  Along with efforts to revitalize the river's waterfront
community and a $1.3 billion plan to improve the city's
environmentally unsound combined sewer system, AWTA
was cited as one of the keys to the project's selection as a
pilot project by EPA. The
volunteer group is a partner-
ship of over 25 public and
private organizations which
seek to address the dangerous
concentrations of toxins in
the  sediments of the
Anacostia Watershed (see
sidebar). To address the sedi-
ment problem, AWTA has
systematically developed and
implemented a three phase
plan, funded  by a combina-
tion of public and private
funds from AWTA members.
      "To work together in good faith as
 partners to evaluate the presence, sources
 and impacts of toxic contaminants in the
Anacostia River with all stakeholders, both
  public and private, and other interested
parties and to evaluate and take actions to
  enhance the restoration of the Anacostia
    watershed to its beneficial use to the
  community and ecosystem as  a whole."
                                   —AWTA Mission
  AWTA's first phase created
a baseline ecological and human health risk assessment
using available existing data and information. Within its
first year, AWTA had compiled the available data into its
Phase 1 Interpretive Summary Report, and identified major
gaps in the information required to take further actions to
address the river's toxics problems.
  During the Phase 2 of its plan, completed in January
2001, AWTA members conducted primary research to fill
in information that was lacking in Phase 1, performed risk
assessments, developed hydrodynamic models and identi-
fied potential remedies for the Anacostia's toxic sediments.
  Now in Phase 3, AWTA is in the process of implement-
ing several remedial actions to clean up the river. The first
major component of this final phase is the placement of a
                          reactive cap on key areas of
                          the river bottom. This per-
                          manent measure, composed
                          of a dense clay cap, will filter
                          and contain contaminants
                          already present and entering
                          the river. Construction of the
                          cap is scheduled to begin in
                          November. Additionally,
                          spring and summer of 2003
                          saw the implementation of
                          several developed low-impact
                          development projects, includ-
                          ing measures to reduce the
                          amount of pavement near the
                          river in order to allow for
                          more natural ground filtering
of water and sediment bound for the river.
                             As one of the nation's 10 most polluted rivers, the
                           Anacostia continues to face contamination from polychlori-
                           nated biphenyls (PCBs), pesticides, heavy metals, and raw
                           sewage discharges from combined sewer overflows. While
                           AWTA's three-phase project may be close to completion, its
                           selection as an Urban River Pilot by EPA and USAGE is
                           sure to increase public awareness of the problems facing the
                           Anacostia, and guarantee that it will never again be called
                           the capital's "Forgotten River." GH3
                                       AWTA Members
    The Academy of Natural Sciences, Patrick Center
    Anacostia Watershed Society
    Atlantic Division, Naval Facilities Engineering
    Command
    ATSDR
    Boiling Air Force Base
    Chesapeake Bay Program Office
    District of Columbia Department of Health
    District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority
    Interstate Commission Water and Sewer Authority
    Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin
    LANTDIV
    Maryland Department of the Environment
                             Metropolitan Council of Governments
                             Montgomery County
                             National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                             National Park Service
                             Naval District Washington
                             Naval Research Laboratory
                             Potomac Power and Electric Company
                             Prince George's County
                             River Keepers
                             University of the District of Columbia
                             U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
                             U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                             U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

-------
Federal  Facilities  Forum  Members Meet Face to Face
     Federal Facilities Forum members
     usually know each other as voices
     on the other end of a speaker
phone during the forum's monthly tele-
conference, but April 21-25 in Seattle,
Washington, the forum strayed from its
usual format as members met face-to-
face during the Technical Support
Project (TSP) annual conference.

  The TSP, which also includes the
similarly-structured Engineering and
Ground Water Forums, was created in
1987 to provide technical assistance to
remedial project managers (RPMs), cor-
rective action staff and On-Scene
Coordinators (OCSs). The conference
provided a valuable opportunity for
forum members to meet and discuss
federal facilities issues. Through the
annual conference and its monthly tele-
conferences, the Federal Facilities Forum
helps to improve communication
between the Regions and Headquarters
by providing a regular, structured for-
mat for sharing information on current
FFRRO policies and areas of concern.

  Forum members, who are appoint-
ed by regional management,  are
typically senior remedial project man-
agers, scientists, technicians or section
chiefs. During the TSP conference,
they discussed a number of issues,
including:

• National Association of Remedial
  Project Managers  (NARPM)
  involvement and coordination

• Technical Information Management
  Systems (TIMS)

• Formerly Used Defense Sites
  (FUDS) inventory

• Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid
  (DNAPL) characterization

• Privatization of DoD cleanups

• Sediment response strategies

• Asbestos cleanup

• Perchlorate contamination and
  response strategies

  Both at the conference and in the
monthly teleconferences, perchlorate
contamination issues have been at the
fore of the Federal Facilities Forum.
Perchlorate is produced primarily for
use as a component of solid rocket pro-
pellant used in government munitions.
It is also used in fireworks. Soil and
water contamination caused by the
manufacture and improper disposal of
perchlorate chemicals is known to affect
some 25 states. Currently, EPA is evalu-
ating the risks posed by perchlorate
contamination, having completed a risk
assessment for perchlorate. Because of
issues related to the science underlying
the risk assessment, several questions
have been recently referred to the
National Academy of Science (NAS) for
review. The review is expected to take a
year to  18 months to complete.

   Federal Facilities Forum teleconfer-
ences are held from 1:30-3:00  pm
Eastern Time on the second Thursday
of each month. For additional infor-
mation about Federal Facilities Forum
calls, please contact your local forum
member. A list of forum members is
available online at .  EQ
  Online Perchlorate Resources

  EPA Technology Innovation Program

    In furthering its mission to advocate more  effective, less costly approaches
  to site cleanups, EPAs Technology Innovation Program has compiled some
  of the  most relevant information on cleaning  up perchlorate-contaminated
  groundwater. 

  Interim Assessment Guidance for Perchlorate
  

  Perchlorate Questions and Answers

    This Q & A document serves to clarify the January 22, 2003 Status of
  EPAs Interim Assessment Guidance for Perchlorate, issued by Marianne
  Lament Horinko. 
Office  of Solid Waste  and Emergency Response  Five Priorities
       OSWER Assistant Administrator Marianne Lament
       Horinko has set forth "Five Priorities" for EPAs Office
       of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.

   "My five priorities form the foundation of OSWER's
commitment to protect human health and the environ-
ment, encourage greater environmental stewardship, and
promote environmental justice in all programs and poli-
cies," said Horinko.

OSWER's Five Priorities are:

Emergency Response and  Homeland Security
   Every year,  OSWER's Emergency Response Program
conducts or oversees hundreds of emergency responses  to
clean up oil spills and hazardous substance releases.
                   OSWER ensures that the cleanup is appropriate, timely,
                   and minimizes human and environmental risks. OSWER's
                   Emergency Response Program provides the people and
                   skills necessary to respond to national security threats faced
                   by this country. The possibility of future terrorist attacks or
                   other large-scale disasters necessitate a national response
                   that is immediate, protective,  and preventive.

                   One Cleanup Program
                    The One Cleanup Program (OCP) is OSWER's vision for
                   how different cleanup programs at all levels of government
                   can work together to improve the coordination, speed, and
                   effectiveness of cleanups at the nation's contaminated sites.
                   OCP encourages improved collaboration among EPA cleanup
                   programs with state, tribal, local and other federal agency pro-

-------
Rocky Mountain  Arsenal  Bids  Farewell  to Western  Tier
     The Western Tier parcel of the Rocky Mountain
     Arsenal (RMA) was deleted from the National
     Priorities List (NPL) on January 21, 2003, making a
positive step for the former defense site. The 940-acre
Western Tier parcel of RMA was first announced for partial
deletion in October  1998, but deletion was delayed after
the comments received during the review period revealed
substantial public concern regarding the  potential for diox-
in contamination in the soil.
   Between the initial 1998 deletion announcement and the
actual 2003 deletion, EPA and the Colorado Department
of Public Health conducted further tests on the Western
Tier soil. After examining results, authorities determined
that the soil indeed did not pose a threat to redevelopment.
The intent to delete the Western Tier of RMA was
announced again in the September 23, 2002 Federal
Register, with the public comment period ending November
22, 2002. Comments received during this comment period
focused principally on how contamination  or munitions
discovered during redevelopment would  be addressed.
   Fears regarding dioxin are rooted in the site's remediation
history. Prior to the  1998 attempt at deletion, the Western
Tier was not subject to soil remediation. A remedial investi-
gation  completed in 1992 examined RMAs soil, water,
structures, air, and biota, and determined that the Western
Tier was exposed to minimal contamination during the
Arsenal's 60-year history. Four years later, the On-Post
Record of Decision (ROD) specified that the Western Tier
would  not require soil remediation since exposure to  the
soil did not pose a risk to humans or biota.
   The determination that the soil posed no risk to humans
was brought under scrutiny when neighboring Commerce
City, which has the right of first refusal for the reuse of the
Western Tier parcel, listed a daycare center among its list of
possible future commercial uses for the site. Facing a public
concerned with the possibility of potentially exposing
infants and children to hazardous chemicals, EPA chose to
take a cautious route, and withdrew the request for deletion
until further tests could be conducted.
  The Army established RMA in 1942 to manufacture
conventional and chemical munitions during World War II,
and leased portions of the facility to private industrial and
agricultural chemical producers in the post-war period.
During that same period, the Army continued to use the
facility for its own chemical development activities. The
industrial and waste disposal practices of the post-war years
led to the first complaints of groundwater contamination in
the  land surrounding the site in 1954.  As a result of conta-
mination caused by the Arsenal's long history of chemical
production, the whole of RMA was eventually placed on
the  NPL in October 1984. It was among the first federal
facilities placed on the NPL, and remedial investigation cul-
minated in a Record of Decision (ROD) in 1996. Remedial
work is expected to cost the Army more than $4 billion by
the  time it is completed.
  The deletion of the Western Tier parcel was another pos-
itive step in the remediation of RMA. While the
remediation of the relatively small Western Tier portion has
been completed and the parcel deleted from the NPL, the
remainder of the 5000+ acre RMA continues to undergo
remediation. Cleanup of this facility will be one of the most
expensive conducted by the U.S. military. Upon comple-
tion, it will be turned over to the  U.S.  Fish and Wildlife
Service for use as a wildlife refuge, as mandated by
Congress. Currently, the General Services Administration is
assessing the value of the deleted Western Tier lands.
Discussions between government  entities and Commerce
City regarding the potential for land purchase and transfer
to Commerce City will follow, lau
grams and stakeholders. You can find information on the One
Cleanup Program, on the Web at
.

Land Revitalization
  The Land Revitalization Agenda (LRA) promotes the reuse
of once-contaminated sites in order to revitalize America's
communities. Because cleanup and reuse are mutually sup-
portive goals, property reuse should be an integral part of the
way OSWER does business. To learn more about OSWER's
Land Revitalization Initiative, go to .

  Workforce Development
    OSWER is committed to developing the  full potential of
  its workforce by encouraging creativity and innovation, pro-
  viding career development opportunities, and assuring that a
  diverse pool of qualified candidates is available for all
  OSWER job opportunities. If you would like more informa-
  tion about OSWER's workforce development, contact Laurie
  May at (202) 566-1918. 03

-------
Modern Technology Speeds Cleanup at
Rocky Flats
RPM's
Corner
D
Iuring its heyday in the 1950s
and 60s, the 6,500 acre Rocky
Flats site was one of the corner-
stones of the United States' ever
expanding nuclear deterrence pro-
gram—the state of the art in weapons
technology. While Rocky Flats has
been inoperative since it was closed for safety reasons in
1989, state of the art technology is again playing an impor-
tant part in the site's history by speeding the $7 billion
cleanup of the former Department of Energy (DOE) site.

Water to the Rescue (Again)

at Building 776/777
Located just 17 miles northwest of metropolitan Denver,
the nature of the work conducted at Rocky Flats was always
a potential danger to city. Never was the danger more obvi-
ous than in 1969, when Building 776/777, the facility's
primary location for plutonium weapons construction,
caught fire. Contemporary wisdom dictated that using
water to douse a plutonium fire would release a radioactive
flash and cloud, but firefighters, facing the potential igni-
tion of the building's 3.5 tons of plutonium, had only
minutes to decide to give the water a try. No calamity
ensued, and sprinkler systems were soon installed in Rocky
Flats buildings.
Though the building was extinguished by firefighters
before the radioactive smoke could affect downtown
Denver, the fire has continued to have a profound effect on
the site and on the current cleanup process. Due to the
volatile nature of the materials used in fabricating the cores
of atomic weapons, Building 776/777 was constructed of
steel slats rather than the concrete that was used in many of
the site's peripheral buildings. While workers constructed
plutonium weapons components within the confines of
sealed glove boxes to limit contamination of the surround-
ing building, the 1969 fire compromised the containment
precautions. Contaminated smoke filled the facility, spread-
ing radiation over and between the building's steel slat
construction.

Over 30 years later, the metal slat construction that was
designed to contain radiation complicates the radiological
cleanup. Unlike concrete, on which contractors can use
skabblers to blast off and collect as much surface material as
necessary before demolishing the structure, the metal build-
ing cannot be cleaned sufficiently to reach free-release
standards. Therefore, the entire structure must be disassem-
bled and disposed of off-site—no small task for the
224,000 square foot building.

Fortunately, new technology has accelerated what would
otherwise be a time-consuming element of cleanup at
Building 776. Originally, metal structures at Rocky Flats
were deconstructed with reciprocating saws, which are com-
monly used to disassemble metal components such as
storage tanks and glove boxes. However, mechanical cutting
tools exposed workers to cutting related hazards, including
breach of protective equipment, and the release of contami-
nants from the surface material during the cutting process.
In some cases, thermal plasma-arc cutting torches are used
for in-situ cutting of metal structures, but require special-
ized containment and ventilation structures to control dust
and fumes and to protect workers from contaminants that
are disturbed in the process.
Rocky Flats Over Time

1950—Congress authorizes expansion of the United
States' nuclear weapons program.
1951—The Atomic Energy Commission, a predecessor
to the Department of Energy, selects Rocky Flats,
Colorado as a nuclear weapons production site.
1952—Production begins at Rocky Flats.
1953—First nuclear components are completed.
1957—Fire in Building 771 contaminates the structure.
1967—Storage barrels leak plutonium contaminated
chemicals into ground at the future site of Pad 903.

1969—Fire in Building 776/777, the main site for com-
ponent construction, threatens Denver with radioactive
smoke. Damage is estimated at $26.5 million.

1972—"Buffer zone"of 4,600 acres is created around
Rocky Flats.

June 1989—FBI and EPA inspect Rocky Flats for envi-
ronmental violations.

-------
  The High Pressure Water-Jet, or the "Super Squirt Gun"
as it is known to Rocky Flats remediation staff, is eliminating
some of the problems associated with other cutting methods.
Like a giant dental tool, the Water-Jet uses a 55,000  pounds
per  square inch stream  of abrasive water that can cut through
1/4 inch stainless steel at two feet per minute, all while only
emitting one gallon of wastewater. The small amount of
water acts as a fixative to contain the contamination  that
would otherwise escape during mechanical or thermal cut-
ting, and is easily collected for safe disposal. The Water-Jet is
a potential boon to the Building 776/777 project, and
should allow contractors to more easily disassemble the
building's metal slats for offsite disposal, as well as allowing
them to easily collect wastewater for safe disposal.

New  Cans for Plutonium

  One of the Rocky Flats site's biggest cleanup problems—
large and unstable stores of weapons grade plutonium—is
also being brought under control with the help of new
technology. In the past, poor protocols for storage of pluto-
nium and plutonium waste resulted in  situations like the
Pad 903 incident, where plutonium-tainted liquids  were
poured into oil barrels and left to the elements until 1967
and resulted in much of Rocky Flats' soil contamination.
The site's weapons grade plutonium has always been stored
in stainless steel containers in on-site vaults, but newer
technology is again providing an added safety margin.

  With the modern cleanup of Rocky Flats, the facility's
remaining plutonium stores are being repackaged for ship-
ping to their permanent resting place at Savannah River,
South Carolina. Rocky Flats' plutonium must first be heated
to restabilize the matter and reduce the  effects of oxidation.
Plutonium is then placed in modern "50 year cans"—dual
wall, stainless steel containers that nestle the radioactive plu-
tonium in a stabilized,  vacuum packed environment.

  In August 2003, Rocky Flats shipped its final container
of weapons grade plutonium offsite.
 The Radioactive Handi-Wipe

   During nearly four decades of active use, Rocky Flats relied
 heavily on sealed glove boxes to protect workers and the envi-
 ronment from the harmful radiation produced n forming
 plutonium into atomic weapons components. Filled with
 inert gas to protect against fire and with the contents acces-
 sible only through shoulder deep gloves, the glove boxes
 helped define the look of 1950s nuclear science. While Rocky
 Flats' army of these boxes protected its workers during the
 site's lifetime, they pose a challenge to remediation efforts.

   Until recently, glove boxes needed to be deconstructed
 with either Zallsaws or arc torches, packaged, and shipped
 off site as true waste due to unremovable plutonium conta-
 mination. However, according to EPA project manager
 Tim Rehder, cerium nitrate decontamination has speeded
 the  disposal of contaminated glove boxes. The new
 method is similar to cleaning a kitchen—simply spray the
 contaminated surface with the cerium nitrate solution,
 wait 20-30 minutes, and wipe away radiation.  Plutonium
 contamination is contained on the wipe, which must be
 properly disposed of, but the glove box surface is reduced
 from true waste to low level waste, facilitating easier and
 less  costly disposal. In Building 776/777, use of new
 decontamination technology has saved an estimated $22
 million, based on a rate of $10,000 saved for each cubic
 meter of glove box cleaned.

   These new technologies, combined with reassessments
 of several areas of the site, have combined to put the
 Rocky Flats cleanup ahead of schedule—administrators
 currently expect the project to be completed in December
 2006. This is good news not only for the wildlife that will
 inhabit the U.S. Fish and Wildlife  Service  (FWS) refuge
 scheduled for the site, but also for the burgeoning Denver
 population, which anxiously awaits the missing segment of
 the beltway scheduled to be built on the edge of the site. EQ
  October 1989—Rocky Flats placed on National
    Priorities List.

  December 1989—Plutonium operations halted on a
    temporary basis for safety reasons. Operations never
    resume.

  1992—President George H.W Bush announces the can-
    cellation of the W-88 Trident Warhead Program.
    Production at Rocky Flats is rendered unnecessary.

  1993—Secretary of Energy formally announces the end
    of nuclear production at Rocky Flats.
1994—Last defense-related shipment leaves Rocky Flats
  as non-nuclear work ceases.

1996—Rocky Flats Cleanup Agreement is signed by the
  Department of Energy, EPA, and the Colorado
  Department of Public Health and Environment.

1997—2006 is targeted for cleanup completion.

December 2001—Congress votes to turn the remediated
  Rocky Flats site into a wildlife refuge operated by the
  Fish and Wildlife Service.

-------
2002  OSWER  National  Achievement  Awards:
Cleanups  Prove  to  Be Win-Win  Situations
     EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
     (OSWER) recently honored the Region 5's Fernald
     Team and John Chesnutt of Region 9 with Federal
Facility Response Notable Achievement Awards. The awards
recognize leadership, innovation, progress, community out-
reach, and  multiple-agency partnership during federal
facility cleanup efforts in 2002.

Fernald Team Award—Region 5

  Brian Barwick, James Saric, and Eugene Jablonowski
make up the Fernald Team—the EPA entity responsible for
overseeing  the cleanup of the Fernald Superfund site, the
first environmental cleanup facility in the Department of
Energy (DOE) complex. The Fernald site is a 1,050-acre
facility, located approximately 18 miles northwest of
Cincinnati, Ohio. The facility was in operation by DOE
from 1951-1991, where high purity uranium metal was
produced in support of national defense programs.

  The Fernald cleanup project, which is expected to cost
an estimated $4 billion at the time of completion in 2006,
poses a great challenge due to its size, expense, level of con-
tamination, and technical complexity. Over two-thirds of
the site contains uranium contaminated soil, and a uranium
groundwater plume measuring one half-mile long and one
eighth-mile wide exists on and off site. In addition,  there
are two radium-bearing waste silos, representing the single
largest source of radium and radon gas generation within
the entire DOE complex. The DOE complex includes
more than  120 facilities nationwide.

  Region 5's Fernald Team assumed a substantial leadership
role,  working extensively with DOE to develop and imple-
ment various strategies to expedite cleanup activities. The
two agencies cooperatively developed  an efficient and cost-
effective Explanation of Significant Differences (BSD)
document that allowed for the utilization of existing thermal
dryers to treat  materials from multiple Operable Units within
the facility.  In addition, as a result of revised waste acceptance
criteria at the offsite disposal facility, EPA has been working
with  DOE  to amend a Record of Decision (ROD) to elimi-
nate the requirement that materials be treated to meet the
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) prior to
offsite disposal. These efforts, among  others, have significant-
ly contributed to the facility's expected closure date being
accelerated  from 2010 to 2006.

  The Fernald team faced a monumental challenge in dis-
posing of 8,900 cubic yards of radon-generating material,
all of which was contained in two silos that were well past
their constructed life span and in danger of collapsing. To
avoid the potential hazards of workers treating waste mater-
ial in unstable structures, EPA and DOE decided to
construct an interim storage unit next to the two dilapidat-
ed silos. The completion of this interim unit was a crucial
step in the safe remediation of the waste material, as it facil-
itated remote extraction and transfer of the material into a
more structurally sound facility for eventual treatment. The
team expects that all material from the two silos will be suc-
cessfully transferred to the interim unit by 2004, greatly
reducing the principal hazard  on the site.

   During 2002, the Fernald team also helped oversee the
completion of a Radon Control System, which siphons
radon gas from the two silos and the interim storage unit,
providing additional safety measures to workers performing
waste treatment. These innovative procedures contributed
to Fernald workers setting a new safety record for the site,
with 10 million consecutive safe work hours and 1,000
consecutive days without a lost time injury or  accident.
This record helped the Fernald site earn the lowest OSHA
recordable injury rate within the DOE complex.

Outreach to the Community
   Through extensive community involvement, sponsored
educational outreach programs, and significant charity
donations, the Fernald Citizens Advisory Board (CAB) has
become recognized as a model for community based deci-
sion-making, both within the  DOE complex and
internationally. At routine committee and board meetings,
the CAB works diligently with EPA and DOE project man-
agers, regulators, and citizens to discuss controversial social
and economic issues. As a result, the CAB  has provided bal-
anced solutions that form the  foundation of Fernald's
cleanup program, cutting years off the original project
schedule and saving taxpayers billions of dollars.

   The Fernald Team also invited 13,000 teachers and stu-
dents to their sponsored educational outreach programs.
To further demonstrate their  commitment to the  commu-
nity, Fernald employees and contractors donated a
combined total of $516,000 during 2002 to charity,
scholarship funds, and civic, education, arts, and  health
and human services programs.

Partnering Pays Off
   Throughout the course of this especially challenging
cleanup effort, the Fernald Team has worked to strengthen
its relationship with DOE and the Ohio EPA. Through its

-------
In-Depth with  the  Fernald  Team,  Region 5
  The Fernald Team, recently honored with the 2002
Federal Facility Response Outstanding Achievement-
Team Award (see page 8), shares their Remediation
Project Manager experiences during the Fernald Cleanup
Project with PIP...
  Fernald Site Highlights

  Acres: 1,050
  Estimated Total Cost Upon Completion:
    Approximately $4 billion
  Number of Completed RODs: Five (one for each
    Operable Unit)
  Number of Completed Removal Actions: 27
  Technical Issues Involved:
  • Uranium contaminated soil covering more than
    2/3 of site.
  • Substantial uranium contamination of the Great
    Miami Aquifer—one of the nation's largest drink-
    ing water aquifers.
  • Two silos containing radium-bearing waste.
  • Structurally unsound silos increasing threat of
    dome collapse and material  release.
  Innovative Approaches to Cleanup:
  • Remote extraction of waste  materials from Silos 1
    and 2.
  • Installation of Radon Control System—siphons
    radon  gas from Silos and interim storage unit.
One-on-One with the Fernald Team (FT):
PIP: What has been the greatest challenge thus far during
     the Fernald site cleanup?
FT:  When managing a project of this size, cost, and tech-
     nical complexity, the biggest hurdle is trying to keep
     things moving. With a large Department of Energy
     (DOE) site, it is often easy to get  caught up in all of
     the details. It is important to take a holistic approach
     on a project like this and maintain an end vision of
     how all of the pieces of the puzzle will fit together. At
     the same time, it is important to challenge the tradi-
     tional timeline and constantly ask yourself and
     others, "How can we accelerate this project?"
PIP: What has been the most important action that the
    Fernald team has taken to overcome this challenge?
FT: Without a doubt—our dedication to cooperation
    and open communication with DOE and other
    agencies involved in the cleanup. Clear and consis-
    tent communication is the key to maintaining
    progress. When an issue of debate arises, it is also
    extremely important to keep personal agendas out of
    the conversation and realize that all parties are work-
    ing to achieve a common end result.
PIP: How much value do you  place on community out-
    reach and involvement during a federal facility
    cleanup effort?
FT: It ultimately depends on the location of the facility
    and the level of interest demonstrated by  the com-
    munity. In almost all cleanup projects, having the
    community involved is extremely important. The
    community's involvement often lends a different
    perspective and provides valuable feedback on
    important issues. Public confidence and support also
    help to  move things along and can often beneficially
    influence  budgetary decisions.
PIP: What is the most valuable thing you have learned
    thus far while managing the Fernald cleanup for EPA?
FT: We often  obsess  on trying to understand all of the
    complexities of every single step of every process.
    This technically  complex  project has taught me  that
    it is more important to be a project manager, not a
    technical expert. My time has been made more valu-
    able by  coordinating the efforts of those who do
    their job best.
PIP: What is some advice that you would give to another
    RPM taking on a similar  project?
FT: Establish and maintain open lines of communica-
    tions with all participating parties and be completely
    upfront with all stakeholders. This facilitates honesty
    and cooperation by all parties and contributes to
    project acceleration. It is also important to have an
    ongoing vision of the project's end state. This helps
    drive you along the course and keep things moving.
  For more information on the Fernald cleanup, visit
 or contact James Saric at (312) 886-
0992 or , Eugene Jablonowski at
(312) 886-4591 or , or Brian
Barwick at (312) 886-6620 or .

-------
10
         National Achievement Awards
         
         understanding of and commitment to a cooperative
         approach to the cleanup, the Fernald Team and its partners
         learned to identify and implement several opportunities for
         both cost and time savings. In addition, the agencies has
         continuously worked together to obtain and maintain the
         support of citizens that is so critical to the project's success.
Proven  Progress

  During 2002, the Fernald Team made extensive
progress towards the beneficial redevelopment and reuse
of the project site. Over 50 percent of the Fernald site
is now certified as clean as a result of the following
remedial actions completed in FY02:

• Excavation and restoration of the South Field.

• Demolition of 112 structures with waste placed into
  the OSDF

• Construction of Radon Control System.

• Construction of interim storage unit.

• Completion of uranium shipments to DOE's
  Portsmouth facility.

• Four natural resource restoration projects.
         John Chesnutt, Region 9, 2002 Individual Federal Facility
         Notable Achievement Award Winner
Individual Award—John Chesnutt,
Region  9

  For seven years, John Chesnutt served as EPA's Remedial
Project Manager at Fort Ord, a closed National Priorities
List (NPL)  military base of approximately 27,000 acres
located near Monterey, CA. Cleanup efforts and property
transfer at Fort Ord are extremely complicated due to large
quantities of unexploded ordnance (UXO). Due to the
environmental setting and potential hazards related to
munitions,  the cleanup at Fort Ord has been embroiled in
controversy. As a result of several lawsuits against Fort  Ord,
the Army was precluded from performing ordnance cleanup
as part of the Removal Actions, and as a result, an Interim
Action ROD was proposed for ordnance clearance at only
the highest  risk former ordnance sites.

  As the EPA  RPM,  Chesnutt assumed a major leadership
role in resolving the critical issues involved in the Interim
Action ROD. In addition to the technical issues, such  as
ordnance detection technology, depth of clearance,  and dis-
posal alternatives, Fort Ord was  faced with an extremely
volatile issue with the local community regarding how  to
remove the  dense vegetation prior to the ordnance removal.
While prescribed burning is the  most effective and  safe
method for vegetation clearance, several community mem-
bers strongly objected due to concerns about the associated
health risks of smoke exposure and the risks of the fires
burning out of control.

  Recognized as a technical expert in the UXO area,
Chesnutt was the coordinator of the Strategic Management
Analysis and Requirements and Technology (SMART)
                          team—part of an agreement
                          that established a partnership
                          between the Army and regula-
                          tors, focusing on UXO issues
                          at Fort Ord. Over the past
                          year, Chesnutt demonstrated a
                          remarkable ability to balance
                          several sensitive and complex
                          issues, ultimately culminating
                          in the signature of the Interim
                          Action ROD, which was  a
                          critical step in allowing the
                          Army to initiate ordnance
                          cleanup.

                             With an understanding of
                          the complex issues associated
                          with UXO cleanup and a
                          desire to address all of the
                          concerns of the community,
                          Chesnutt was instrumental in
                          convincing the Army that sig-
                          nificant outreach efforts were
                          necessary before EPA could

-------
Detonation Using Innovation

As part of the SMART team's efforts, Chesnutt
helped develop and implement a technology matrix
used to evaluate various UXO detonation methodolo-
gies. The team also developed other innovative
processes and criteria to reduce the hazards and expe-
dite the UXO clearing process, including:

• Methodology for establishing a safe buffer zone for
areas adjacent to UXO

• More stringent UXO clearance requirements that
allow for early property transfer, while still assuring
its safe reuse

• Alternatives to open detonation, minimizing noise,
frag, and potential emissions.
sign the Interim Action ROD and initiate ordnance clear-
ing. In addition to monthly meetings on the Proposed
Plan, EPA and the Army sponsored a series of comprehen-
sive symposia on the specific issues of ordnance clearing
and prescribed burning, in which Chesnutt presented EPAs
official position. Also included in Chesnutt's outreach strat-
egy was an Army-funded voluntary relocation program for
community members concerned about the potential health
effects during the burn. This unprecedented initiative,
along with the other extensive outreach culminated in com-
munity acceptance that vegetative burning was necessary to
adequately prepare the ordnance areas for clearance.
A critical factor that has contributed to the overwhelm-
ing progress and success at Fort Ord is the amount of
interagency communication and cooperation. As the RPM,
Chesnutt participated in all of the meetings and negotia-
tions with the multiple agencies involved in the cleanup
and was often relied upon to present controversial posi-
tions. Using his technical expertise and leadership,
Chesnutt was instrumental in convincing the various agen-
cies that the alternatives proposed in the Interim Action
ROD were most effective for safe and efficient ordnance
clearing while maintaining community support. EHJ

Fort Ord—A Year of Accomplishments

During FY 02, Chesnutt's leadership and innovation
culminated in'.

• Completion of two Remedial Actions

• Finalization of two Findings of Suitability for
Transfer (FOSTs)

• Completion of first Five-Year Review at Installation

• Signature of Interim Action ROD for Ordnance
Clearing

• Transfer of 7,000 acres for use by the Fort Ord Reuse
Agency and California State University—Monterey
Bay
Write To Us
We encourage your questions, comments, and contributions. Please send your input to Dianna Young by mail at
U.S. EPA/FFRRO, Mailcode: 5106G, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20460; e-mail at
; or fax at 703 603-0043.
Join Our Mailing List And/Or Sign
Up to Receive PIP Electronically
Beginning with this issue, P/Pwill be available in both
print and online electronic formats. If you wish to
receive e-mail notification of new online PIP issues,
please send an email to . If
you would like to be on the FFRRO mailing list to
receive future printed issues of Partners In Progress,
please fill out and return this form to the address above.
Name:
Agency/Organization:,

Street Address:

City:
State:
.Zip Code:
Phone Number:.

E-mail:
D I wish to receive PIP electronically.

a I wish to receive PIP in printed form.

a I wish to receive PIP both electronically and via mail.

-------
&EPA
   United States
   Environmental Protection Agency
   (5106G)
   Washington, DC 20460
   Official Business
   Penalty for Private Use $300
First Class Mail
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
G-35
   Federal  Facilitie;
   Restoration  and  Reuse Office
     ) Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper.

-------