Six weeks after introducing a draft revised consent order that will govern future hazardous waste cleanup at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico Environment Secretary Ryan Flynn returned to the Northern New Mexico Citizens’ Advisory Board (NNMCAB) on Wednesday to sound out some new ideas. While announcing he was extending the public comment period for the document for another 15 days, to May 31, Flynn said he and his staff have enjoyed “Great meetings with all different perspectives, great dialogs, and great questions and generally positive conversations.”
Input came to Flynn from a handful of public meeting with individual and community stakeholders, 12 sets of written comments, and face-to-face sessions with nongovernmental organizations and other community groups. Two of the stakeholder groups, NNMCAB and the Regional Coalition of LANL Communities, receive funding from the Department of Energy.
Flynn expressed hope that even with an extension the draft could be finalized by the end of July and become the new basis for the environmental cleanup at LANL until completion. That goal is roughly projected to take at least another decade. The schedule set under the original 2005 consent order came up well short of completion after the first 10 years.
Flynn reported that concerns about limiting public participation requirements and access to documents under the draft consent order were among the main themes he and his staff had identified so far from comments that covered the spectrum from supporting to opposing the draft consent order.
“It is essential that the state and lab make all communications, documents and submittals specified in this Consent Order readily available to the people of New Mexico and the world,” wrote one citizen quoted in a sample selection. “I believe there is nothing to hide in this process and it will only be made strong through this open public process,” wrote another.
NMED officials say the revised proposal emphasizes accelerated cleanup. The new “campaign approach” packages related projects in bundles that can be most efficiently managed based on project similarities such as proximity and hazardous risk priorities, Flynn said the response to the document has been mainly positive, but the public wanted to be more involved in a variety of ways. While preferring in general not to comment on the comments at this point, and with many details of the revised consent order yet to define, Flynn offered a few suggestions about some new ideas that have been stimulated by the public participation: “(I)deas that we didn’t think of and will help us when we sit down to renegotiate the contract in the next couple of weeks.”
One question that came up during the comment period, he said, was what happens to the decisions that have already been made about the campaigns and how they are prioritized. Also, what will happen to the new policies when the governor and the state administration change three years from now?
“How can we incorporate public participation into specific parts of the planning process?” Flynn asked. One answer, he suggested, based on discussions with two communities in particular, might be the addition of provisions for Los Alamos County and the nearby neighboring Pueblo of San Ildefonso to be involved in changes in cleanup priorities, updating milestones, and regrouping campaigns since most of the cleanup will be going on closest to their communities. Related to this, the department is proposing to add a provision requiring an annual public meeting to the cleanup planning process, a suggestion found to be widely popular among all the groups and communities.
Even the representatives of a nonprofit public interest group, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, supported the idea of an annual public meeting. “I think that’s a great idea,” said Scott Kovac, the group’s operations and research director. On the other hand, Nuke Watch also called for the current draft consent order to be completely withdrawn, saying in a written statement submitted at this week’s meeting that the public participation provisions in the existing 2005 consent order are preferable. They request that all notices, milestones, targets, annual negotiations, and modifications require public review and comment and the opportunity for a public hearing. “The public deserves the opportunity to comment on the draft Consent Order,” Kovac said. “Is there a document out there that we haven’t seen?”
Earlier this month, Nuke Watch filed a federal lawsuit against DOE and lab manager Los Alamos National Security for hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid penalties from violations of the 2005 consent order. In response to criticism for granting delays for cleanup deliverables and reducing penalties stipulated in the original consent order. Flynn told the advisory board that the $74 million settlement finalized earlier this year with DOE for violations at LANL and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant was a record amount.
Members of the citizens’ advisory board probed for additional information along a broad front.
What about the stipulated penalties for missed targets and milestones? Penalties will be increased and there will be an added provision for using the money for “supplemental environmental projects,” (SEPs) that invest the money back into local environmental projects of affected communities. Flynn said.
Who will sign the consent order? “I sign and DOE signs,” said Flynn, noting that the Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management is now overseeing legacy cleanup at the lab being carried out under a bridge contract with Los Alamos National Security. However, DOE is moving to rebid both the cleanup and M&O contracts at Los Alamos. “We want the new contractor to sign, but DOE has not agreed,” Flynn said.
Will there be an end date when cleanup can be declared finished? One of the key changes listed is about “considering addition of an end date,” Flynn said.
By a vote of 10 in favor and two abstentions the board approved a set of recommendations to reflect the group’s comments about the consent order during their discussion and specifically including their support of “accelerated cleanup” and the “campaign approach,” as it has been presented by Flynn.
