DOE Should Increase Outreach on SRS Monitoring, Lab Report Finds
WC Monitor
12/19/2014
Though existing environmental monitoring programs in South Carolina and Georgia are sufficient to protect the public from potential Savannah River radiological releases, an independent lab report found that the Department of Energy should increase outreach efforts on the topic. The Savannah River Site Citizens’ Advisory Board recommended in January that DOE work with Georgia to fund an independent environmental monitoring program in that state. Though DOE did not accept the recommendation, it commissioned a study by the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory to follow up. While there weren’t deficiencies or weaknesses in the existing monitoring programs in the two states, “concerns persist” from the public about radiation levels and DOE transparency, Gary Mills, a SREL associate research scientist who worked on the report, told WC Monitor.
The technical data in DOE and state reports on environmental monitoring is often hard to understand for area residents, particularly those in rural areas without a high level of education, Mills said. “It’s difficult to put into context. There is also the fear and concern of whether they are being told the truth,” he said. DOE should “help them understand the data that is available, and if warranted provide some additional data that is more specific to their immediate environment, including their backyards. And also DOE should continue to build a level of trust, showing that DOE and the states of South Carolina and Georgia are concerned about their health and that there are adequate protections in place.”
‘Citizens of Georgia Have Repeatedly Expressed Concerns’
In addition to the DOE and South Carolina state environmental monitoring programs, DOE funded a program carried out by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources from 2001 to 2005, the January CAB recommendation notes. “In the past two years, citizens of Georgia have repeatedly expressed concerns about the lack of an independent environmental monitoring program in Georgia similar to the one funded by the Department of Energy in South Carolina,” the recommendation states. “While budget reductions and restrictions have made it difficult for the Department of Energy to fund a renewed environmental monitoring program in Georgia, one of the important functions of the federal government is to protect its citizens. As a result, the Department of Energy should take the concerns of the citizens of Georgia seriously and take actions to satisfy their concerns.”
While DOE in March told the CAB it did not accept the recommendation, it asked the Ecology Lab to complete a report on whether a Georgia program would be necessary and how the concerns could be addressed. “In our report we concluded that the existing monitoring program from DOE Savannah River, complemented by the monitoring program from South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control was more than sufficient to protect the public not only in South Carolina but also in the surrounding regions across the region in Georgia from any adverse health impacts due to radiological releases,” Mills said.
Instead of a new monitoring program in Georgia, the Ecology Lab recommended that DOE improve its monitoring and outreach efforts. “At the community level we need to talk with leaders there and first try to help educate them on what’s being done, what data we are finding and the overall context based on not only U.S. but worldwide regulations,” Mills said. “We can put it into that perspective that we are well below any concern of a health risk at this point in time or recent history. We need to work with the community leaders to get assistance to how we can best present that to the people in their community.” The SREL report also recommended that DOE and South Carolina better align their monitoring data so that they are presented in similar ways.
DOE Reviewing Report Recommendations
The Department is reviewing the conclusions in the Ecology Lab report, DOE Savannah River spokesman Jim Giusti said. “We are currently reviewing the SREL recommendations and evaluating those that will further enhance our monitoring program. As part of the review phase, we will also discuss with SCDHEC the recommendations on better aligning our programs, and will discuss with SREL their views on developing new communication strategies,” he said.
