Department of Energy seeks input on potential citizen advisory board

Reed Hodgin, facilitator for the Rocky Flats, Colorado Site-Specific Advisory Board, addresses an audience member's question during the evening session of the November 20 meeting.

The meeting, held on November 20 at the Lab's Brookhaven Center, brought together community members, members of existing advisory boards from DOE sites across the nation and other interested parties. The purpose of the workshop was to exchange information about board successes and problems as a first step towards deciding if an SSAB should be formed at BNL.

The workshop included the presentation of general information about functioning site-specific advisory boards at other DOE sites around the country and featured an evening panel discussion between community members and members of existing boards. Workshop participants included advisory board members from the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site in Colorado, the Nevada Test Site, the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, the Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee, the Fernald Site in Ohio and the Hanford Site in the state of Washington.

Types of boards

These boards are structured groups that have been formed under the guidelines of the 1972 Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). FACA provides standards that govern the establishment, operation, administration, and duration of advisory committees and stresses that such boards exist to advise and recommend, not decide. According to FACA, the purpose of the board must be clearly defined, its membership must be balanced, and its recommendations should be the result of its members' independent judgment.

FACA is just one of several ways to form an oversight board. Some groups, believing the constraints of FACA pose a barrier to meaningful discussion and input, have formed boards that are run under a charter drafted and agreed upon by all members. Also, even if a FACA board is established at a site, it does not preclude other groups from forming non-FACA oversight boards.

Roles and responsibilities

Site-specific advisory boards are but one method to increase public participation in decision making at a DOE site. They do not, and are not intended to, replace existing or future public participation activities. Although the role of such a board varies at different sites, the basic responsibilities are similar for most of these boards. These responsibilities include:

• Providing policy information, advice and recommendations concerning environmental restoration, waste management and technology development to the assistant secretary of DOE's Environmental Management program, the director of DOE's Office of Intergovernmental and Public Accountability, and DOE field site managers.
• Providing input and recommendations on strategic decisions that impact future use of the site, risk management, economic development and budget prioritization activities.
• Providing site-specific input and recommendations.

Membership key to success

According to the DOE's SSAB Final Guidance document, the member selection process is crucial to any board's success, and the formation process should provide an opportunity to include representation of all interested parties. Board membership (usually 10 to 20 members) should reflect the diversity of views in affected communities and regions, and include members representing local governments, environmental and civic groups, labor unions, site employees and any other interested parties. Ex-officio (non-voting) members may include representatives from DOE, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and state and local governments. All meetings are open, and the public is encouraged to attend.

Members, who are not paid for their participation, must be willing to dedicate a significant amount of time to the board, as meeting attendance is just one requirement. Members are expected to:

• Participate in an open and constructive manner.
• Provide advice and comment on environmental management issues to the decision makers.
• Represent and communicate community interests and concerns.
• Act as a conduit for the exchange of information among the community, DOE and environmental oversight agencies regarding the environmental management program at the facility.
• Review, evaluate and comment on documents and other materials related to environmental management at the facility.

Members may also receive training in team building; reaching a consensus; environmental regulations; roles and responsibilities of DOE, its laboratories, EPA, and state regulators; and the history of environmental contamination at the specific site.

Lead agency must contribute as well

Although a significant time contribution on the part of the members is required, DOE must also do its part. DOE must be willing to participate in a open and constructive manner, commit to financial support for the group, and ensure that the board has the opportunity to offer advice in the environmental management decision-making process.

While much information was shared during the November meeting, this workshop was intended to be a starting point for any interested parties. Over the next few weeks and months, DOE will continue to distribute information about SSABs to the community and other interested parties and gather feedback. After that feedback is collected and reviewed, a decision will be made whether such a board is right for both the Lab and the community as a whole.

For more information, contact John Carter, U.S. Department of Energy-Brookhaven Group, at 344-5195.

Back to cleanupdate

Back to the ERD Home Page