United States

        Environmental Protection

        Agency	
               EPA 505-F-99-005

                 June 1999

              www.epa.gov/swerffrr
&EPA
        Solid Waste and Emergency Response (5101)
Federal Facilities Restoration

and Reuse Office
   Federal Facilities
     Environmental
   Restoration
     Dialogue
       Committee
     A Federal Agency Collaboration

-------
FFERDC—A Blueprint for
Creative Solutions

It has become increasingly important that
public stakeholders— citizens like you—take
an active role in effectively influencing and
overseeing decisions concerned with the
cleanup of federal facilities. To foster this
collaboration between federal agencies and
citizens, in 1993 the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) established a forum, the Fed-
eral Facilities Environmental Restoration
Dialogue Committee (FFERDC). FFERDC's
mission was to provide a blueprint for all
stakeholders —the public, regulators, and
regulated agencies—to develop creative
solutions to the challenges associated with
environmental  pollution at federal facilities.
The dialogue set a high standard for pubic
participation and serves as a model for all
serious environmental dialogues.

  The blueprint contained in [the FFERDC]
  report is the bridge to the future of our
  cleanup program. Cleanups done efficiently
  and effectively with the support and back-
  ing  of affected  communities, as recom-
  mended by the Committee, are investments
  that build healthy and safe American com-
  munities.
  Tad McCall, Assistant Secretary
  U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C.

    Federal facility sites are the bases,
installations, plants, field offices, and labora-
tories owned and operated by the federal
government, or operated for the federal
government under contract. Agencies that
operate these facilities include

• the Department of Defense (DoD);
 • the Department of Energy (DOE); and
 • the Department of Interior (DOI) units
  including the U.S. Forest Service, the
  Bureau of Land Management, and the
  Bureau of Reclamation.

     The Committee members, representing
 diverse interests, released the FFERDC Final
 Report (also known as the Keystone or "teal"
 report) in April 1996. The principles and
 recommendations outlined in this Report
 reflect the consensus of 50 perspectives of
 those involved with and affected by federal
 facilities cleanup decisions. The  FFERDC Final
 Report presents a new approach for making
 federal facilities cleanup decisions reflect the
 priorities and concerns of all stakeholders.

     As part of the FFERDC dialogue, the
 Committee released 14 principles it believed
 should be the basis for making federal facil-
 ity cleanup decisions and should apply to all
 persons and institutions involved in the
 process. These principles serve as a founda-
 tion for the Committee's specific recommen-
 dations about four key areas: 1) sharing
 information, 2) ensuring environmental
justice, 3) establishing advisory boards, and
 4) understanding the federal  budget process.

 Sharing Information

     Stakeholders are people affected  by or
 who otherwise have an interest or "stake" in
 federal facility cleanup decisions. To improve
 stakeholder involvement in the federal
 facility cleanup decisionmaking process,
 FFERDC suggests linkages should be devel-
 oped with communities and public stakehold-
 ers across the nation to 1) share information
 about how priorities are being set and deci-
 sions are being made at federal facilities, and

-------
2) ensure effective distribution of informa-
tion to the public regarding cleanup efforts.
FFERDC recommends that regulated agen-
cies:

• alert the public to the fact that preliminary
  documents are draft and may  change,
• establish central points of contact for
  providing information, and
• develop information-sharing policies and
  procedures.

    FFERDC also recommends that each
agency share environmental-restoration-
related information with interested parties.
This information includes related documents;
timely information pertinent to environmen-
tal restoration decisionmaking; information,
interpretations,  and proposed  direction for
advisory groups; and agency policy on infor-
mation flow.
Ensuring Environmental Justice
    FFERDC demonstrates an enduring
commitment to the Environmental Justice
Executive Order (Executive Order 12898,
February 11,1994). Stakeholders include
indigenous peoples, low-income communi-
ties, and minorities who have had no oppor-
tunity for meaningful participation in the
decisionmaking process. Historically, these
citizens, as well as local governments have
not been involved adequately in the federal
facility cleanup decisionmaking and priority-
setting process. Today, the overall goal  of
agencies responsible for conducting and
overseeing cleanup at federal facilities  is to
ensure that cleanup decisions and priorities
reflect a broad spectrum of stakeholder input
from all affected communities.
  This report gives us a road map which, if
  followed, will ensure that all of the local
  voices are accounted for by the federal gov-
  ernment as it prioritizes and cleans up the
  most pressing environmental problems at
  its thousands of sites around the country.
  Mildred McClain, Executive Director
  Citizens for Environmental Justice,
  Savannah,  GA

     The effectiveness of community in-
volvement in the budgeting and priority-
setting process is dependent on all stake-
holder groups having the capacity to partici-
pate meaningfully. Through environmental
justice programs, federal  agencies help
stakeholders increase their capacity for
meaningful  participation.
          ^    j   m      j
          TT
Establishing Advisory Boards

     Another FFERDC strategy includes estab-
lishing citizen advisory boards to strengthen
stakeholder participation by actively involving
representatives of the local community and
others in cleanup decisionmaking  at federal
facility sites.

     DOE Site-Specific Advisory Boards
(SSABs) provide policy and technical input on
DOE cleanups. SSAB membership includes
representatives from:
•  local government,
•  Indian tribes,
•  environmental and civic groups,

-------
• universities, and
• other interested stakeholders.

    SSABs provide a forum for experts and
concerned stakeholders to discuss specific
cleanup activities and submit recommenda-
tions to DOE. SSAB recommendations affect
strategic decisions impacting future land use,
risk management, economic development,
and budget reprioritization activities. In
addition, Board recommendations achieve
cost savings and increase the pace of
cleanup.

    DoD policy is to establish Restoration
Advisory Boards (RABs) at  military installa-
tions scheduled for realignment or closure,
and other DoD installations or Formerly Used
Defense Sites throughout the country.  RABs
promote teamwork by bringing  members of
the community together with military offi-
cials and government regulators to discuss
cleanup issues. As a result, RABs successfully
increase community understanding of
cleanup issues and  progress, provide greater
opportunities for communities to participate
in the cleanup process, and enhance the
credibility of installations.

  The Department  of Defense has partici-
  pated in the FFERDC  since it was estab-
  lished. The Committee's interim report had
  profound  impacts on DoD and led to the
  establishment of Restoration Advisory
  Boards at over 300 installations. There is no
  question that RABs have  improved our res-
  toration program  and will  continue to do
  so.
  Sherri W. Goodman, Deputy Under Secretary
  U.S. Department of Defense, Washington, D.C.
Understanding the Federal Budget
Process

    FFERDC establishes budget development
processes to ensure that funding shortfalls
caused by insufficient appropriations do not
severely limit environmental restoration
activities at individual sites. The "flexible fair
share" approach to the allocation of funding
shortfalls provides a method for distributing
the available funds in an equitable manner.

    FFERDC recommends regular and exten-
sive communication and consultation be-
tween affected parties at four distinct points
within the process where public involvement
is beneficial:

1) Initial survey of site-specific requirements
  for  cleanup,
2) Submission of the President's budget to
  Congress,
3) Presidential/congressional appropriation
  and agency funding, and
4) Completion of annual funding.


FFERDC at Work
Oak Ridge Reservation
Oak Ridge, Tennessee

Much stakeholder concern exists regarding
what shape the land and buildings will be in
following cleanup of contaminated sites. The
condition of land and buildings following site
cleanup is commonly referred to as 'end
use.'

    In February 1996, the Oak Ridge Reserva-
tion End Use Working Group was assembled
to provide DOE with locally based recommen-
dations for the end uses of its properties.

-------
Comprised of about 15 to 20 individuals,
membership to the working group and its
committees was open to stakeholders and
the interested public. Group members stud-
ied specific site information; toured the site;
and examined cost, volumes, and risks
associated with alternative end uses at the
various contamination sources. The group
also agreed to accept public recommenda-
tions or to hold a public hearing to discuss
why a recommendation was rejected. Finally,
the group pared down the glut of informa-
tion into one-page recommendations to DOE
that members could sign in support  if they
chose.

    On June 30,1998, the group completed
its official activities that resulted in the
creation of the Final Report of the Oak Ridge
Reservation End Use Working Group and the
Stakeholder Report on Stewardship. End use
recommendations for the Oak Ridge Reserva-
tion were primarily determined by its division
into five watersheds—areas drained by a
common river or stream. The  group made
valuable recommendations for each of these
five areas, as well as for a waste disposal
site.
  The FFERDC dialogue has set a high stan-
  dard for public participation and serves as
  a model for all serious environmental dia-
  logues.
  Melinda Downing, Acting Deputy Director,
  Office of Intergovernmental and Public
  Accountability, U.S. Department of Energy,
  Washington, D.C.
Badlands Bombing Range
Pine Ridge, South Dakota

    The Badlands Bombing Range Restora-
tion Advisory Board is the most complex
intergovernmental and community advisory
group in the country. Membership in this
RAB reflects 8 federal agencies, 11 tribal
government organizations, state agencies,
diverse community and landowner groups,
and the general public. The Badlands Bomb-
ing Range RAB helps guide and oversee the
cleanup of a 341,726-acre bombing range
used during the second World War by the Air
Force and the South Dakota National Guard.

  Through the RAB process, the Oglala Sioux
  Tribe, the DoD, EPA, Indian Health Service,
  Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the state of
  South Dakota are striving to educate tribal
  landowners on the results of investigations
  and restoration  options for 341,725-acre
  FUDS property on the Pine Ridge Reserva-
  tion. This partnership paved the way for the
  first memorandum of agreement and co-
  operative agreement between a tribal na-
  tion and DoD.
  Emma Featherman-Sam,
  RAB Community Co-Chair,
  Former Badlands Bombing Range, SD

    As the first  RAB established by DoD in
Indian Country, the Badlands Bombing
Range RAB initially met in July 1995 and
continues to meet quarterly on the Oglala
Sioux Tribe's Pine Ridge Reservation. These
meetings provide a forum through which
tribal and community concerns and issues
are heard and addressed  during the cleanup.
The diversity and broad-based expertise of
the member agencies and organizations
ensure the best  acceptable alternatives for

-------
remediation are selected.

    The Badlands Bombing Range RAB is
equally directed by four Co-Chairs:

• the Oglala Sioux Tribe,
• the U.S. Air Force,
• the U.S. National Park Service, and
• the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

    Each Co-Chair organization has direct
financial and management responsibilities as
well as trust responsibilities for the restora-
tion of these tribal lands.

How Can Interested Citizens
Become More  Involved?
Each citizen has a stake in the future of
federal facilities, and the FFERDC process
demonstrates the value of public involve-
ment in the process of making decisions
about our environment. Making the right
decisions takes teamwork and an investment
in the future to effect the changes needed to
implement the many recommendations.

    Are you interested in getting more
involved? The listing of FFERDC Contacts
provides further information (including tele-
phone numbers and webpage addresses)  on
the federal government offices that offer
opportunities for concerned members of the
community to participate in federal facilities
cleanup decisionmaking.

 For copies of the FFERDC Final Report,
 call EPA's Federal Facilities Restoration
 and Reuse Office (FFRRO) at (202) 260-
 9924 or view the Report at
 www.epa.gov/swerffrr/ferdcrpt/toc.htm
Federal Agency FFERDC
Contact Information
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
USDA, 14th Street & Independence Ave.,
S.W., Washington, DC 20250; Phone: 2027
720-2791; Internet Address:
www.usda.gov.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Na-
tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin-
istration (NOAA). NOAA Office of Public
& Constituent Affairs, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th  Street & Constitution
Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20230; Phone:
202/482-6090; Internet Address:
www.noaa.gov.

U.S. Department of Defense (DoD),
Environmental Security/Cleanup. DoD's
Environmental Cleanup homepage:
www.dtic.mil/envirodod.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE),
Office of Environmental Management
(EM). The Center for Environmental
Management Information, EM Program,
U.S. Department  of Energy, P.O. Box
23769, Washington, DC 20026-3769;
Phone: 1-800-736-3282; Internet Address:
www.em.doe.gov.

U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry (ATSDR). The
ATSDR Information Center:  888-422-8737
or 888-42ATSDR; Internet Address:
www.atsdr.cdc.gov/atsdrhome.html

-------
Federal Agency FFERDC Contact Information Continued

• U.S. Department of the  Interior, Office of
 Environmental Policy and Compliance
 (OEPC). OEPC,
 U.S. Department  of the Interior, 1849 C St.,
 N.W., Washington, DC 20240; Phone: 2027
 208-3891;    Internet Address: www.doi.gov/
 oepc/oepchome.html.

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 (EPA), Federal Facilities  Restoration and
 Reuse Office (FFRRO). U.S. EPA/FFRRO, 401
 M St., Mail Code 5101, Washington, DC 20460;
 Phone: 202/260-9924; Internet Address:
Consensus: Principles for
Environmental Cleanup (restated from
FFERDC Final Report, April 1996)
  1.   The federal government has a moral and ethical
       obligation to clean up the contamination it has
       caused or permitted.

  2.   The federal government must make a sustained
       commitment to environmental cleanup.

  3.   The federal government has an obligation to
       make special efforts to reduce the adverse
       impacts of environmental contamination related
       to federal facility activities on affected communi
       ties that have historically lacked economic and
       political power, adequate health services, and
       other resources.

  4.    Federal facilities should be treated consistently
       with private sector sites.

  5.    Federal facility cleanup contracts need to be
       reformed to ensure that cleanup activities are
       conducted as efficiently as possible.

  6.    Funding mechanisms for cleanup should be
       reformed to provide greater flexibility in the
       timing of expenditures.
7.    The decisionmaking process must ensure that
     the roles of all of the stakeholders are preserved
     and balanced.

8.    Negotiated cleanup agreements play a critical
     role in setting priorities at sites.

9.    Risk assessment should be used in a manner
     that recognizes its limitations and assumptions,
     and human health risk is only one factor among
     many that warrant consideration in priority
     setting.

10.   Pollution prevention and pollution control
     activities differ from cleanups and should be
     funded as a cost of doing business.

11.   Reasonably anticipated future land use should
     be considered when establishing cleanup
     standards for federal facilities.

12.   The identification and characterization of
     contamination are essential parts of the cleanup
     process and should not be arbitrarily limited.

13.   Priority-setting decisions should be made in a
     manner that recognizes their
     interconnectedness to other environmental
     problems.

14.   Cleanup decisions must include the views of the
     affected communities.

-------