Hanford Natural Resource Trustee Council History & Accomplishments

The first organizational meeting for the NRTC was held in Richland, WA, April 9, 1993, at the invitation of the U.S. Department of Energy - Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL). The Council was formed later that year by the State of Washington, State of Oregon, DOE-RL, U. S. Department of the Interior (currently represented by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, Nez Perce Tribe, and the Yakama Indian Nation. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is a statutory trustee and began to participate intermittently with the Council in 1997. See Members for Trustee Council members and representatives.

The Trustee Council operates by consensus and progress over the years has been careful and deliberate. Each Trustee represents a number of constituencies encompassing many interests. Trustee organizations have diverse roles. For instance, USDOE is both a Trustee and the response agency and Washington is both a Trustee and a regulator. Reaching consensus on guiding documents, principles, and actions takes considerable time and effort.

Trustees approved a Memorandum of Agreement in 1996. Bylaws were approved in 1997. The Trustees pursue good working relationships and early involvement in decision-making. The Council is a dynamic assembly of agencies, Tribal Nations, and individuals who are committed advocates for the land, the unique Hanford habitat, and the Columbia River.

Trustees deal with a long list of issues. In the early years of Council, the Trustees focused much of their effort on the Ecological Risk Assessments and other cleanup activities being conducted on the Hanford Site, such as those associated with the Central Plateau cleanup, the River Corridor Closure Project and the Groundwater Project.
In 2005, a contractor was hired to conduct a literature compilation/review of documents related to potentially injured natural resources at the site. A final summary report was also part of that effort.
In 2006, the Yakama Nation completed a preassessment screen for the Hanford Site and determined that there was sufficient information regarding on-going injury to proceed with a natural resource damage assessment. Washington State concurred with the Yakama Nation’s determination. In 2007, the CTUIR also completed a preassessment screen and a determination to proceed with a Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) for Hanford.
In 2007, the Trustees decided to proceed with a phased NRDA approach and begin the Injury Assessment phase in parallel with ecological risk assessments. The Injury Assessment is designed to evaluate the extent to which natural resources in and around the Hanford Site have been impacted by hazardous contaminants released from the Hanford Site. To the extent such impacts are identified, the Trustees will quantify the injuries and establish the type and quantity of restoration necessary to compensate for the injured natural resources and the lost services associated with the injured resources.

Along with the task of keeping abreast of the various risk assessments and related NRDA actions the Trustees are also concerned about selecting appropriate reference sites and background values for the Hanford Site, establishing a reliable source of native seed and plants for restoration actions, and the effect of chromium and other contaminants in the groundwater on the Columbia River, salmon, eels, and humans. The Trustees must be very sure of their decisions as they are legally responsible to their respective constituents to protect, remediate, or replace lost or injured resources and services.

In 2008, a contractor was hired to perform Phase I of the injury assessment planning process including development of a list of potentially injured natural/cultural resources and defining the focus and scope of the injury assessment.
Phase I was completed on June 30, 2009. During Phase I, six technical work groups (TWGs) were formed to assist in the injury assessment process, including Source/Pathway, Groundwater, Aquatic Resources, Terrestrial Resources, Human Uses, and Restoration. A seventh TWG, Data Management/QA was subsequently added in 2010.

Phase I deliverables included the following:

Memorandums providing summaries of meeting(s) and workshops with Trustees
List of potentially injured natural resources and cultural resources
List of relevant information sources, including databases, studies, reports, documents and other literature; and data management, handling and maintenance proposal
Hanford Site Natural Resource Damage Assessment, Phase I Summary Report, including key appendices:
- Tribal Use of Natural Resources in NRDA
- Hanford Site Natural Resource Damage Assessment Draft Conceptual Site Model
- Hanford Site Natural Resource Damage Assessment Data Management Report

In 2010, Phase II was initiated with the hiring of a contractor for preparation of the injury assessment plan. This effort is scheduled to be completedin early 2013. The objective of Phase II is for the natural resource Trustees and their selected contractor to collaboratively produce an Injury Assessment Plan for potentially injured natural and cultural resources, and the services that flow from them, resulting from releases of hazardous substances from the Hanford Site, all as defined by CERCLA and the DOI NRDA regulations (42USC 9601 et seq., 43 CFR Part 11). The plan will define a holistic, site-wide approach for injury assessment related to releases from the Hanford Site. The plan will also identify those areas where Hanford releases have come to be located or might be located in the foreseeable future, and the location of resources that may have been injured or potentially be injured by contact with these releases or injured by actions associated with the remediation of the releases.

The Injury Assessment Plan will be prepared in accordance with the DOI regulations for a NRDA Type B assessment except where Trustees agree another method is appropriate. This assessment planning process will be designed to address all natural resources, injury categories, and services listed in the DOI NRDA regulations or identified by the Trustees. Phase II deliverables include the following:

Injury assessment plan
Injury study recommendations
List of early restoration opportunities
Toxicological/injury profiles, service flow report, preliminary injury thresholds and tests, and ecological summary reports
Information management system framework
Data management plan
Data gap report
QA management plan
Public involvement plan Updated CSM.

The Trustees also initiated 4 injury studies in FY2011 including:

Updating a report to compile data into a single source to identify past and current concentrations of contaminants, in biota at specific facilities and waste sites
A study to determine if adverse changes as described in 43CFR11 occur in native mussels exposed to hazardous substances released from the Hanford site
Regenerate groundwater contaminant plume maps, perform a calculation of plume areas and volumes, determine the uncertainty of the data being used in these methods, determine where the majority of uncertainty lies and make an initial determination of the adequacy of contaminant plume mapping at Hanford for the Trustees needs
Hired an Information Integration Liaison to integrate and summarize data associated with aquatic resources. The Liaison will access data, metadata, and current DOE and contractor models, and provide summary analysis for the HNRTC technical working groups for use in scoping, planning and injury/damage estimates in support of the aquatic injury assessment