The Role of Risk and Future Land Use in Cleanup Decisions at the Department of Energy

As a result of the legacy of the Cold War, the Departments of Energy and Defense are involved in massive cleanup and remediation projects. While health risk to humans and ecological receptors is perceived to be the basis for remediation, this assumption is rarely examined. In this article, we examine the role of risk and future land-use designations in cleanup decisions, using the Department of Energy's self-assessment of 36 sites. We then discuss the risk-related tools that might be required to address the cleanup challenge. Much of the current cleanup program is driven by compliance with federal and state statutes and regulations, presumably to protect human health and the environment. Compliance, however, is not synonymous with cleanup. Although some of these laws and regulations take risk into account, the lack of site-specific data on exposures and risk scenarios, and the lack of attention to future land use or end states, has often resulted in disconnects between risk and cleanup goals, risk and final end states, and cleanup levels and end state or subsequent land use. Partly, these disconnects result from the need for a range of technical, economic, sociological, and public policy tools to address the issues. A better transfer of information among and within Department of Energy facilities, operations offices, and DOE headquarters is required. Further, linking cleanup decisions and goals with the final end state involves a number of risk tradeoffs, including (1) ecological versus human health, (2) worker versus public health, (3) among competing contaminated areas, (4) among temporal patterns of cleanup, (5) among different ecological receptors (plants vs. animals, one animal vs. another), and (6) among the sites across the DOE complex. For the nation, balancing among risks is essential within sites and among Department of Energy sites, as well as among other remediation sites (such as those of Department of Defense and Superfund sites).     

Practical Methods for Meeting Remediation Goals at Hazardous Waste Sites

Risk-based cleanup goals or preliminary remediation goals (PRGs) are established at hazardous waste sites when contaminant concentrations in air, soil, surface water, or groundwater exceed specified acceptable risk levels. When derived in accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency's risk assessment guidance, the PRG is intended to represent the average contaminant concentration within an exposure unit area that is left on the site following remediation. The PRG, however, frequently has been used inconsistently at Superfund sites with a number of remediation decisions using the PRG as a not-to-exceed concentration (NTEC). Such misapplications could result in overly conservative and unnecessarily costly remedial actions. The PRG should be applied in remedial actions in the same manner in which it was generated. Statistical methods, such as Bower's Confidence Response Goal, and mathematical methods such as "iterative removal of hot spots," are available to assist in the development of NTECs that ensure the average postremediation contaminant concentration is at or below the PRG. These NTECs can provide the risk manager with a more practical cleanup goal. In addition, an acute PRG can be developed to ensure that contaminant concentrations left on-site following remediation are not so high as to pose an acute or short-term health risk if excessive exposure to small areas of the site should occur. A case study demonstrates cost savings of five to ten times associated with the more scientifically sound use of the PRG as a postremediation site average, and development of a separate NTEC and acute PRG based on the methods referenced in this article.     

Risk Communication in Environmental Restoration Programs

The author advocates adoption of a convergence model in place of the traditional source-receiver model of communication for communicating with members of the public who have a stake in remediation of a nearby site. The source-receiver model conceives of communication as the transmission of a message from a risk management agency (sender) to a target audience of the public (receivers). The underlying theme is that the sender intends to change the perception of the receiver of either the issue or the sender of information. The author draws on her experience at a Department of Energy (DoE) site undergoing remediation to illustrate why the convergence model is more appropriate in the context of cleanup. This alternative model focuses on the Latin derivation of communication as sharing or making common to many (i.e., as involving a relationship between participants who engage in a process of communication). The focus appears to be consistent with recently issued DoE policy that calls for involving the public in identifying issues and problems and in formulating and evaluating decision alternatives in cleanup. By emphasizing context, process, and participants, as opposed to senders and receivers, the model identifies key issues to address in facilitating consensus concerning the risks of cleanup. Similarities between the institutional context of DoE and Department of Defense (DoD) suggest that a convergence model may also prove to be an appropriate conceptual foundation for risk communication at contaminated DoD sites.     

A Systematic Uncertainty Analysis of an Evaluative Fate and Exposure Model

Multimedia fate and exposure models are widely used to regulate the release of toxic chemicals, to set cleanup standards for contaminated sites, and to evaluate emissions in life-cycle assessment. CalTOX, one of these models, is used to calculate the potential dose, an outcome that is combined with the toxicity of the chemical to determine the Human Toxicity Potential (HTP), used to aggregate and compare emissions. The comprehensive assessment of the uncertainty in the potential dose calculation in this article serves to provide the information necessary to evaluate the reliability of decisions based on the HTP A framework for uncertainty analysis in multimedia risk assessment is proposed and evaluated with four types of uncertainty. Parameter uncertainty is assessed through Monte Carlo analysis. The variability in landscape parameters is assessed through a comparison of potential dose calculations for different regions in the United States. Decision rule uncertainty is explored through a comparison of the HTP values under open and closed system boundaries. Model uncertainty is evaluated through two case studies, one using alternative formulations for calculating the plant concentration and the other testing the steady state assumption for wet deposition. This investigation shows that steady state conditions for the removal of chemicals from the atmosphere are not appropriate and result in an underestimate of the potential dose for 25% of the 336 chemicals evaluated.     

The Value of Reducing Cancer Risks at Contaminated Sites: Are More Knowledgeable People Willing to Pay More?

We use conjoint choice questions to investigate people's tastes for cancer risk reductions and income in the context of public programs that would provide for remediation at abandoned industrial contaminated sites. Our survey was self-administered using the computer by persons living in the vicinity of an important contaminated site on the Italian National Priority List. The value of a prevented case of cancer is €2.6 million, but this figure does vary with income, perceived exposure to contaminants, and respondent opinions about priorities that should be pursued by cleanup programs.     

Improving Health Risk Assessment as a Basis for Public Health Decisions in the 21st Century

One-fifth of the way through the 21st century, a commonality of factors with those of the last 50 years may offer the opportunity to address unfinished business and current challenges. The recommendations include: (1) Resisting the tendency to oversimplify scientific assessments by reliance on single disciplines in lieu of clear weight-of-evidence expressions, and on single quantitative point estimates of health protective values for policy decisions; (2) Improving the separation of science and judgment in risk assessment through the use of clear expressions of the range of judgments that bracket protective quantitative levels for public health protection; (3) Use of comparative risk to achieve the greatest gains in health and the environment; and (4) Where applicable, reversal of the risk assessment and risk management steps to facilitate timely and substantive improvements in public health and the environment. Lessons learned and improvements in the risk assessment process are applied to the unprecedented challenges of the 21st century such as, pandemics and climate change. The beneficial application of the risk assessment and risk management paradigm to ensure timely research with consistency and transparency of assessments is presented. Institutions with mandated stability and leadership roles at the national and international levels are essential to ensure timely interdisciplinary scientific assessment at the interface with public policy as a basis for organized policy decisions, to meet time sensitive goals, and to inform the public.     

Quantitative Risk Assessment of the New York State Operated West Valley Radioactive Waste Disposal Area

This article is based on a quantitative risk assessment (QRA) that was performed on a radioactive waste disposal area within the Western New York Nuclear Service Center in western New York State. The QRA results were instrumental in the decision by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority to support a strategy of in‐place management of the disposal area for another decade. The QRA methodology adopted for this first of a kind application was a scenario‐based approach in the framework of the triplet definition of risk (scenarios, likelihoods, consequences). The measure of risk is the frequency of occurrence of different levels of radiation dose to humans at prescribed locations. The risk from each scenario is determined by (1) the frequency of disruptive events or natural processes that cause a release of radioactive materials from the disposal area; (2) the physical form, quantity, and radionuclide content of the material that is released during each scenario; (3) distribution, dilution, and deposition of the released materials throughout the environment surrounding the disposal area; and (4) public exposure to the distributed material and the accumulated radiation dose from that exposure. The risks of the individual scenarios are assembled into a representation of the risk from the disposal area. In addition to quantifying the total risk to the public, the analysis ranks the importance of each contributing scenario, which facilitates taking corrective actions and implementing effective risk management. Perhaps most importantly, quantification of the uncertainties is an intrinsic part of the risk results. This approach to safety analysis has demonstrated many advantages of applying QRA principles to assessing the risk of facilities involving hazardous materials.     

A Procedural Evaluation of an Analytic-Deliberative Process: The Columbia River Comprehensive Impact Assessment

The U.S. Department of Energy's Columbia River Comprehensive Impact Assessment (CRCIA) was an ambitious attempt to direct its cleanup of the Hanford Nuclear Reservation toward the most significant risks to the Columbia River resulting from past plutonium production. DOE's approach was uncommonly open, including tribal, regulatory agency, and other Hanford interest group representatives on the board that was to develop the assessment approach. The CRCIA process had attributes of the "analytic-deliberative" process for risk assessment recommended by the National Research Council. Nevertheless, differences between the DOE and other participants over what was meant by the term "comprehensive" in the group's charge, coupled with differing perceptions of the likely effectiveness of remediation efforts in reducing risks, were never resolved. The CRCIA effort became increasingly fragmented and the role its products were to play in influencing future clean-up decisions increasingly ambiguous. A procedural evaluation of the CRCIA process, based on Thomas Webler's procedural normative model of public participation, reveals numerous instances in which theoretical-normative discourse disconnects occurred. These had negative implications for both the basic procedural dimensions of Webler's model-fairness and competence. Tribal and other interest group representatives lacked the technical resources necessary to make or challenge what philosopher Jurgens Habermas terms cognitive validity claims, while DOE and its contractors did not challenge normative claims made by tribal representatives. The results are cautionary for implementation of the analytic-deliberative process. They highlight the importance of bringing rigor to the evaluation of the quality of the deliberation component of risk characterization via the analytic-deliberative process, as well as to the analytic component.     

A Spatial Approach to Environmental Risk Assessment of PAH Contamination

The extent of remediation of contaminated industrial sites depends on spatial heterogeneity of contaminant concentration and spatially explicit risk characterization. We used sequential Gaussian simulation (SGS) and indicator kriging (IK) to describe the spatial distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), pH, electric conductivity, particle aggregate distribution, water holding capacity, and total organic carbon, and quantitative relations among them, in a creosote polluted soil in southern Sweden. The geostatistical analyses were combined with risk analyses, in which the total toxic equivalent concentration of the PAH mixture was calculated from the soil concentrations of individual PAHs and compared with ecotoxicological effect concentrations and regulatory threshold values in block sizes of 1.8 × 1.8 m. Most PAHs were spatially autocorrelated and appeared in several hot spots. The risk calculated by SGS was more confined to specific hot spot areas than the risk calculated by IK, and 40–50% of the site had PAH concentrations exceeding the threshold values with a probability of 80% and higher. The toxic equivalent concentration of the PAH mixture was dependent on the spatial distribution of organic carbon, showing the importance of assessing risk by a combination of measurements of PAH and organic carbon concentrations. Essentially, the same risk distribution pattern was maintained when Monte Carlo simulations were used for implementation of risk in larger (5 × 5 m), economically more feasible remediation blocks, but a smaller area became of great concern for remediation when the simulations included PAH partitioning to two separate sources, creosote and natural, of organic matter, rather than one general.     

Applications of probabilistic risk assessments: the selection of appropriate tools

Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) is an important methodology for assessing the risks of complex technologies. This paper discusses the strengths and weaknesses of PRA. Its application is explored in three different settings: adversarial policy processes, regulatory/licensing procedures, and plant safety audits. It is concluded that PRA is a valuable tool for auditing safety precautions of existing or planned technologies, especially when it is carried out as an interactive process involving designers and plant personnel who are familiar with actual, everyday operations. PRA has not proven to be as well-suited in providing absolute risk estimates in public-policy debates concerning the acceptability of a technology, or for the licensing and regulatory procedures. The reasons for this are discussed.     

Methodology for setting risk-based concentrations of contaminants in soil and groundwater and application to a model contaminated site

In Japan, environmental standards for contaminants in groundwater and in leachate from soil are set with the assumption that they are used for drinking water over a human lifetime. Where there is neither a well nor groundwater used for drinking, the standard is thus too severe. Therefore, remediation based on these standards incurs excessive effort and cost. In contrast, the environmental-assessment procedure used in the United States and the Netherlands considers the site conditions (land use, existing wells, etc.); however, a risk assessment is required for each site. Therefore, this study proposes a new framework for judging contamination in Japan by considering the merits of the environmental standards used and a method for risk assessment. The framework involves setting risk-based concentrations that are attainable remediation goals for contaminants in soil and groundwater. The framework was then applied to a model contaminated site for risk management, and the results are discussed regarding the effectiveness and applicability of the new methodology.     

Determinants of Risk Perceptions of a Hazardous Waste Site

A before-stimulus-after quasi-experimental design is used to assess the factors relating to risk perceptions of a hazardous waste site. First, a pretest obtains measures of attitudes and beliefs about hazardous waste and waste sites. Second, a detailed hypothetical "Superfund" scenario, including a complex cleanup plan, is introduced. Finally, indices of health risk estimates, trust, knowledge, and other pertinent beliefs are obtained. Levels of concern, both before and after cleanup, are the dependent variables. Independent variables include risk management options, health risk estimates, trust, and five sociodemographic characteristics. Concern is extremely high prior to cleanup and moderately high after cleanup. Concern is a clear function of health risk estimates. Toxic chemicals from waste sites are viewed as a major cause of multiple health problems, especially cancers. Accurate health risk estimates moderate fears and are linked to levels of education. Education, however, does not explain concern. Trust is a major factor explaining concern and health risk estimates. The implications of these findings for risk communication is discussed.     

Risk analysis of PCB exposure via the soil-food crop pathway, and alternatives for remediation at Serpukhov, Russian Federation.

A risk assessment was conducted to determine the likelihood of certain health risks resulting from exposure to soils and food crops contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs). PCBs have contaminated soils, river sediments, and air in the past as a result of industrial activities at a capacitor plant located in the City of Serpukhov, Russian Federation. This risk assessment and suggestions for remediation are designed to aid in decision-making efforts by a joint Russian-American research team developing a community, national, and international response to industrial contamination. Bobovnikova et al. (The Science of the Total Environment 139/140, 357-364, [1993]) have reported that PCBs are elevated in soils and sediments, breast milk, and locally grown foods in the Serpukhov area. Data from these and other investigators have been used in this risk assessment to calculate a potential cancer risk resulting from exposure to PCBs. Our assessment indicates that members of the local population may be at increased risk of cancer, and possibly other adverse health effects, as a result of PCB contamination of their environment. Because previously unassessed environmental contamination is a common problem in the former Soviet Republics, as well as many other areas of the world, we believe this type of evaluation, using known methods, can serve as a model for assessment efforts in other parts of the globe and result in remediative efforts in regions constrained by faltering economies.     

The Precautionary Principle Versus Risk Analysis

Precautionary behavior serves a valuable protective purpose as a first response to the new. It causes a quick retreat to the safety of the familiar; it provides time for a realistic "friend or foe" assessment of a new event. This rational assessment is often delayed by the sluggishness of government bureaucratic processes, or stopped by an implied challenge to a status quo. At the public level, reassurance may be slow to overcome an early uncertainty. However, a precautionary response does not provide an operational governing principle, although it makes publicly plausible an indefinite concealment of de facto political actions, or nonaction. The alternative of rational decision making at the policy level should flow from a comparative benefit/cost/risk analysis. Such early risk analyses have pragmatic uncertainties based on the limited available knowledge base and, accordingly, require judgmental application.     

Risk Analysis of PCB Exposure via the Soil–Food Crop Pathway, and Alternatives for Remediation at Serpukhov, Russian Federation

A risk assessment was conducted to determine the likelihood of certain health risks resulting from exposure to soils and food crops contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs). PCBs have contaminated soils, river sediments, and air in the past as a result of industrial activities at a capacitor plant located in the City of Serpukhov, Russian Federation. This risk assessment and suggestions for remediation are designed to aid in decision-making efforts by a joint Russian–American research team developing a community, national, and international response to industrial contamination. Bobovnikova et al. ( The Science of the Total Environment 139/140 , 357–364, [1993]) have reported that PCBs are elevated in soils and sediments, breast milk, and locally grown foods in the Serpukhov area. Data from these and other investigators have been used in this risk assessment to calculate a potential cancer risk resulting from exposure to PCBs. Our assessment indicates that members of the local population may be at increased risk of cancer, and possibly other adverse health effects, as a result of PCB contamination of their environment. Because previously unassessed environmental contamination is a common problem in the former Soviet Republics, as well as many other areas of the world, we believe this type of evaluation, using known methods, can serve as a model for assessment efforts in other parts of the globe and result in remediative efforts in regions constrained by faltering economies.     

Financing Liabilities Under Superfund

One of the more critical environmental risk areas involves the financing of cleanup costs associated with past improper disposal of hazardous wastes. These costs will run into the tens of billions of dollars. The federal Superfund program and related state programs are the driving forces for cleaning up hazardous waste. Under Superfund, the government collects taxes and coordinates cleanup strategies, and searches for potentially responsible parties (generators, disposers, transporters) to assist in financing the cleanup. To lessen the financial impact, responsible parties are looking to their liability insurers to provide coverage under old general liability insurance policies. Insurance companies contend that Superfund liabilities are not covered under liability policies. The paper examines the various financing methods and liabilities produced by Superfund. Particular emphasis is placed on developments in the courts which are resulting in a significant shift in the financial responsibilities to the insurance industry. Broad estimates of the financial impact of Superfund liabilities are developed. Finally, several public policy issues, which are raised by the topics exmained in this paper, are discussed.     

Computer Models Used to Support Cleanup Decision-Making at Hazardous and Radioactive Waste Sites

Massive efforts are underway to clean up hazardous and radioactive waste sites located throughout the United States. To help determine cleanup priorities, computer models are being used to characterize the source, transport, fate, and effects of hazardous chemicals and radioactive materials found at these sites. Although the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)have provided preliminary guidance to promote the use of computer models for remediation purposes, no agency has produced directed guidance on models that must be used in these efforts. As a result, model selection is currently done on an ad hoc basis. This is administratively ineffective and costly, and can also result in technically inconsistent decision-making. To identify what models are actually being used to support decision-making at hazardous and radioactive waste sites, a project jointly funded by EPA, DOE, and NRC was initiated. The purpose of this project was to: (1)identify models being used for hazardous and radioactive waste site assessment purposes; and (2)describe and classify these models. This report presents the results of this study. A mail survey was conducted to identify models in use. The survey was sent to 550 persons engaged in the cleanup of hazardous and radioactive waste sites; 87 individuals responded. They represented organizations including federal agencies, national laboratories, and contractor organizations. The respondents identified 127 computer models that were being used to help support cleanup decision-making. There were a few models that appeared to be used across a large number of sites (e.g., RESRAD). In contrast, the survey results also suggested that most sites were using models which were not reported in use elsewhere. Information is presented on the types of models being used and the characteristics of the models in use. Also shown is a list of models available, but not identified in the survey itself.     

Consideration of Background Exposures in the Management of Hazardous Waste Sites: A New Approach to Risk Assessment

The current approach to health risk assessment of toxic waste sites in the U.S. may lead to considerable expenditure of resources without any meaningful reduction in population exposure. Risk assessment methods used generally ignore background exposures and consider only incremental risk estimates for maximally exposed individuals. Such risk estimates do not address true public health risks to which background exposures also contribute. The purpose of this paper is to recommend a new approach to risk assessment and risk management concerning toxic waste sites. Under this new approach, which we have called public health risk assessment, chemical substances would be classified into a level of concern based on the potential health risks associated with typical national and regional background exposures. Site assessment would then be based on the level of concern for the particular pollutants involved and the potential contribution of site contaminants to typical background human exposures. While various problems can be foreseen with this approach, the key advantage is that resources would be allocated to reduce the most important sources of human exposure, and site remediation decisions could be simplified by focussing on exposure assessment rather than questionable risk extrapolations.     

Providing reliable information to clients: The case of environmental remediation

This article provides an overview and discusses the implications for the recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure requirements for environmental remediation liabilities. The overview and discussion is based upon the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants' Statement of Position (SOP) 96-1 “Environmental Remediation Liabilities.” The article concludes with a discussion of the CPAs reporting responsibility and related issues with respect to this major contemporary issue. A primary goal of CPA firms is to provide quality service to clients, In the realm of financial reporting, quality service means providing clients with reliable information. An increasing number of small and large businesses are exposed to high costs and large potential liability for cleanup of environmentally hazardous material. Certified public accountants who provide compilation, review, or audit services with respect to a non-public entity's financial statements need to be aware of the disclosure and reporting implications of companies confronted with disposal and cleanup of hazardous material.     

The Benefits of Probabilistic Exposure Assessment: Three Case Studies Involving Contaminated Air,Water, and Soil1

Probabilistic risk assessments are enjoying increasing popularity as a tool to characterize the health hazards associated with exposure to chemicals in the environment. Because probabilistic analyses provide much more information to the risk manager than standard “point” risk estimates, this approach has generally been heralded as one which could significantly improve the conduct of health risk assessments. The primary obstacles to replacing point estimates with probabilistic techniques include a general lack of familiarity with the approach and a lack of regulatory policy and guidance. This paper discusses some of the advantages and disadvantages of the point estimate vs. probabilistic approach. Three case studies are presented which contrast and compare the results of each. The first addresses the risks associated with household exposure to volatile chemicals in tapwater. The second evaluates airborne dioxin emissions which can enter the food-chain. The third illustrates how to derive health-based cleanup levels for dioxin in soil. It is shown that, based on the results of Monte Carlo analyses of probability density functions (PDFs), the point estimate approach required by most regulatory agencies will nearly always overpredict the risk for the 95^th percentile person by a factor of up to 5. When the assessment requires consideration of 10 or more exposure variables, the point estimate approach will often predict risks representative of the 99.9^th percentile person rather than the 50^th or 95^th percentile person. This paper recommends a number of data distributions for various exposure variables that we believe are now sufficiently well understood to be used with confidence in most exposure assessments. A list of exposure variables that may require additional research before adequate data distributions can be developed are also discussed.