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. Hanford NRDAR work through FY 2012 was focused primarily on completing Phase II products .  Key Phase II products prepared by Industrial Economics, Incorporated (IEc) for the Hanford Natural Resource Trustee Council (Council) include: 1) draft Injury Assessment Plan (IAP) and related products/activities such as the Data Gap Report and draft Preliminary Estimate of Damages (PED), 4 expert panels, development of recommendations for initial studies/resource review reports, development of preliminary thresholds and tests and preparation of public involvement materials.  Work in FY 2013 will begin the transition to implement more comprehensive injury studies identified in Phase II planning documents such as the IAP, Data Gap Report and Resource Review Reports.   

As noted earlier, issuance of the draft IAP was a significant accomplishment for FY 2012.  The IAP provides an outline of the approach the Hanford Trustees will take to assess injuries to natural resources stemming from releases of Site-related hazardous substances. The development of an IAP is intended to ensure that NRDAR is conducted in a planned and systematic manner and at a reasonable cost (43 CFR § 11.30(b)). The IAP describes 40 ongoing and anticipated studies designed to evaluate past, current, and future natural resource injury and associated losses of resource services. Ultimately, the information collected through implementation of the IAP will inform the scope and scale of restoration activities needed to restore natural resources and resource services to their baseline condition, thereby achieving the goal of the NRDAR process.

The IAP formalizes the Trustees’ current understanding of the studies that may be necessary to determine and quantify injury to site resources and resource services. A prioritization process will identify the studies that will be implemented and the sequence of studies, given limits on available funding and other considerations. The DOI regulations also provide that an assessment plan may be modified as new information becomes available (43 CFR Section 11.33 (e)). Therefore, implementation of initial studies may suggest addition of future studies to the current list, and may deprioritize others.  The draft IAP will undergo a public review/comment process in the 1st quarter of FY 2013.

One injury study, Contaminated Biota Study was completed and 2 other studies, Groundwater Contaminant Plume Mapping, and Mussel Toxicity Study were initiated.  A statement of work was developed and proposal received for the planning of an Upwelling Study.

The Council continued to meet on a monthly basis to plan, organize, control and direct Hanford NRDAR activities.  The Senior Trustees met periodically to review progress and address issues elevated from the Council.  The Council provided formal advice to DOE, and as appropriate to EPA, WA Department of Ecology and the Hanford Advisory Board on Trustee guiding principles, 100-K Remedial Investigation/ Feasibility Study, NRDAR integration and vegetation management. A strategic planning effort was initiated to identify the mission, vision, goals, limitations, strengths and solutions/strategies to substantially complete a Hanford NRDAR restoration plan within 10 years.  

H on a regular basis to assist in study development, review environmental/contaminant release data, and make recommendations to the Council.    

The Council developed a statement of work (SOW) for Hanford NRDAR data management and received a proposal for implementing and maintaining the data management system.  As of this date, the Council is still deliberating on a near and long term approach data management.