|
be composed primarily of people who are directly affected by facility cleanup activities. An open and fair membership selection process that leads to the creation of a diverse and balanced board should be used. Boards should develop procedures for adding, replacing, or removing members. Operations—At the outset of the advisory process, the board should determine explicitly how it will make decisions about what advice and recommendations it should give, who should give the advice and, in particular, how to ensure that dissenting views are addressed. Advisory board members should develop appropriate ground rules and operating procedures to allow for the efficient and productive operation of the group. (The chapter outlines a number of specific rules and procedures to be considered.) Advisory boards should establish a self-evaluation process to address the goals of the board at the various stages of its development. Federal agencies are also encouraged to support efforts that will assist communication between public stakeholders in various advisory board efforts across the country. Education and Training—An advisory board training needs assessment should be conducted for each advisory board. It should take into account needs for technical assistance notification, orientation, team building, and ongoing education. Public Interaction—Members of the public must be given opportunities to be kept adequately informed of and involved in cleanup decisions affecting them. Funding—The regulated agency should provide advisory board funding for both administrative support and technical assistance. |
|
Technical assistance funding should be used to complement, rather than duplicate, the technical programs of both regulated and regulating agencies. Boards must demonstrate a clear need to be eligible for technical assistance”. The 1996 report begins, on page 23 (PDF - 42), to elaborate on risk and relative risk assessment with the following conclusions and recommendations: “With the exception of emergency response situations, the Committee believes direct measures and estimates of human health and environmental risk are relatively more important in deciding whether to take action and, if so, what action should be taken, than in the case of deciding when the action should be accomplished. In using risk evaluation methodologies to determine the timing and sequence or, in the opposite case, delay of cleanup activities or projects, the primary focus should be on the relative risk reduction potential of those actions rather than the relative risk posed by the contamination. The relative risk is more appropriate to consider when deciding whether to take action and if so, what action. As noted, the Committee believes the analytical tools that are currently available to evaluate human health and environmental risk have scientific uncertainties that are often not well understood or acknowledged by policy makers. Because of this, the Committee recommends that all key decision makers should adhere to the following when using risk assessments: |
|
aesthetic, public health, and worker health and safety effects of cleanup and waste management and technology development issues related to cleanup. Advisory boards should remain separate from local reuse authorities, but should work together with them wherever possible. Advisory boards should only address anticipated future land uses when they relate to cleanup decisions, and when efforts are made to involve stakeholders sufficiently with key interests in land use, such as local governments, in the discussions. Agency Roles—The regulated agency should serve as the host of the advisory board and should provide administrative assistance, meeting facilities, and other logistical support as necessary. Regulated and regulating agencies roles should be defined in three ways. First, the most senior-level person available at the facility from the regulated agency should participate in board meetings. Second, participants from the regulated and regulating agencies should be responsive to the concerns and advice of the advisory board or provide a reasonable explanation for not adhering to the advice. Third, representatives from regulating and regulated agencies should serve as information sources to the board, providing updates and background as needed. Agencies should consider including contractor representatives as a part of their team particularly to help in this last function. However, contractor participation should never serve as a substitute for the participation of senior representatives of the regulated agency. Membership—Advisory boards should reflect the full diversity of views, ethnicity, race, and distribution of income in the affected community and region and |
FFERDC Guidance (pre 2000)
(CONT’D FROM P. 17)
|
