Information Briefing to the Sixth National Tribal Conference on Environmental Management Patricia Ferrebee Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program (GAP) Guidance on the Award and Management of General Assistance Agreements for Tribes and Intertribal.
Advertisements

1 Midland Community Meeting Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Steven Chester, Director Jim Sygo, Deputy Director.
1 Siting and Military Capabilities: DoD’s Energy Siting Clearinghouse Bill Van Houten Energy Siting Clearinghouse Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment) Environmental Management Directorate MRSPP Review & Update (and other Good Stuff)
Melinda Brunner DEC Contaminated Sites Program 20 th Annual Alaska Tribal Conference on Environmental Management Anchorage, Alaska October 30, 2014.
TITLE OF PROJECT PROPOSAL NUMBER Principal Investigator PI’s Organization ESTCP Selection Meeting DATE.
The Alaska Brownfield Initiative John B. Carnahan Alaska DEC – Brownfield Coordinator Alaska Forum on the Environment
DOE 2010 Long-Term Surveillance and Maintenance Conference November 17, 2010 Loren W. Setlow, CPG Office of Radiation and.
Program Alternatives under 36 CFR Part 800 Dave Berwick Army Affairs Coordinator Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
Improving Tribal –DoD Relations: Contracting Programs.
Environmental Review: NEPA, TEPA and Tribes. NEPA – good and bad for Tribes Tribes can use as tool to slow, examine, participate in process and urge changes.
Improving Traffic Crash Reporting on Tribal Lands in South Dakota David Huft Research Program Manager South Dakota DOT SD Safety Conference February 22,
Pravin Amar Development Planners 14 July 2005, Assagay Hotel, 5pm Applicant: EnviroServ Waste Management (Pty) Ltd. Environmental Consultants Pravin Amar.
Alaska Contaminated Lands Conveyed to Alaska Native Corporations
Guidelines for State School Environmental Health Programs EISA Sec. 504.
Division of Homeland Security & Emergency Management Al Cavallo Brief Disaster Assistance Overview with an emphasis on Tribal Roads Declaration Process.
1 Arroyo Center R UXO Risk Assessment Methods: Critical Review Jacqueline MacDonald, Debra Knopman, J. R. Lockwood, Gary Cecchine, Henry Willis RAND.
Sacred Sites. Documentation Documentation: Forest Supervisor or Ranger District Offices may document Sacred site (s) information in a variety of ways.
I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e Headquarters U.S. Air Force As of:1 Jane Yagley Program Manager ANG/A7CVP (301) Cultural.
1 OAR Guidance on -- “Consulting with Indian Tribal Governments” May 21, 2012.
EPA’s Brownfields Program Megan Quinn U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization January 25, 2008.
Tier I: Module 4 CERCLA 128(a): Tribal Response Program Element 3: Public Participation.
C&T Partners and Their Roles Henry Ghiotto Quechan Indian Tribe.
Tier 1 Module 3 CERCLA 128(a) Tribal Response Program Element 2: Oversight & Enforcement.
Cultural Resource Management in the Department of Defense September 29, 2005 Maureen Sullivan Federal Preservation Officer.
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Ms. Maureen Sullivan Federal Preservation Officer Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations.
Using ISO and EDYS as a Framework for Creating a Sustainable Range Management System 30th Environmental & Energy Symposium & Exhibition April 5 -
What is the purpose of the Class I Redesignation Guidance? Provides guidance for tribes who are considering redesignating their areas as Class I areas.
Tier 1 Module 7 CERCLA 128(a) Tribal Response Program Establishing a TRP.
Productive SB 18 Consultation Michelle LaPena, Esq. LaPena Law Corporation 2001 N Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA (916)
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations and Environment) Army Munitions Response Topics Environmental Affairs Committee Society of Military Engineers.
Integrating Other Laws into BLM Planning. Objectives Integrate legal requirements into the planning process. Discuss laws with review and consultation.
Informational Briefing to the Munitions Response Committee July 11, 2002 Developing a Prioritization Protocol for Munitions Response Sites.
Improving Motor Vehicle Crash Reporting on Tribal Lands in South Dakota David Huft, June Hansen, James Carpenter, Lee Axdahl February 20, 2008.
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Ms. Maureen Sullivan Federal Preservation Officer Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations.
Pilot Projects on Strengthening Inventory Development and Risk Management-Decision Making for Mercury: A Contribution to the Global Mercury Partnership.
SERDP- ESTCP- ITRC A PARTNERSHIP Dr. Jeffrey Marqusee ESTCP, Director SERDP, Technical Director.
Tier 1 Module 4 CERCLA 128(a) Tribal Response Program Element 3: Public Participation.
0 Developing a Prioritization Protocol for Munitions Response Sites Presentation to the National Congress of American Indians November 13, 2002 Patricia.
Module 9: Natural Resource Assessment and Damages (NRD)
By Rachel Coleman.  “ The head of any federal agency having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed federal or federally assisted undertaking.
What is a Public Health Assessment? “The evaluation of data and information on the release of harmful substances into the environment in order to assess.
Environmental Assessment in British Columbia Forum of Federations Conference September 14, 2009.
Welco EPA TRIBAL PROGRAMS Cathy Villa, EPA Tribal Coordinator EPA’s Tribal Programs leads the effort to protect human health and the environment of federally.
NRC Environmental Reviews for Uranium Recovery Applicants and Licensees James Park (301)
1 Nanoscale Materials Stewardship Program Environmental Summit May 20, 2008 Jim Alwood Chemical Control Division Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
EPA Superfund Program Risk Initiatives in Indian Country Risk-Based Decision-Making in Indian Country March 14-16, 2000 Lakewood, CO James Konz U.S. EPA.
Submitting Comments on EPA’s Clean Power Plan National Tribal Air Association’s Project Director Andy Bessler.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Paul Lumley Senior Tribal Liaison, ODUSD (I&E)
Forging Partnerships on Emerging Contaminants November 2, 2005 Elizabeth Southerland Director of Assessment & Remediation Division Office of Superfund.
I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e Headquarters U.S. Air Force The Air Force Military Munitions Response Program For: Mr. William.
Chapter 19 Environmental Law Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent.
EPA Proposed Ground-level Ozone (O 3 ) NAAQS Rich McAllister National Tribal Air Association Policy Advisory Committee Hobbs Straus Dean & Walker.
1 The Brownfields Grant Program and Opportunities for Revitalization of RCRA Sites Linda Garczynski, Director Office of Brownfields Cleanup and Redevelopment.
1 Historic DoD Ocean Disposal Operations, Requirements, and Research Hawaii Robotics Initiative for Underwater Military Munitions Oahu, Hawaii October.
Protecting Cultural Sites Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Environmental Waste Management Program By Zannita Armell.
Remediation and Redevelopment at the Former Fort Devens, Massachusetts.
Proposed Plan for No Further Action
Tribal Hazard Mitigation Planning
DoD Relative Risk and Indian Lands
Tribal Leadership & Institutional Impacts on Homeownership
CERCLA 128(a) Tribal Response Program Site Specific Work: Introduction
Susan Barnes Vice-Chairman Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Overview of 2019 Non-BIA Federal Register Notice
Designations for Indian Country
Environmental Protection Agency
National Defense Industrial Association
Overview of 2020 Non-BIA Federal Register Notice
Introduction to Brownfields
Presentation transcript:

Information Briefing to the Sixth National Tribal Conference on Environmental Management Patricia Ferrebee Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations & Environment)/Cleanup June 6, 2002 Developing a Prioritization Protocol for Munitions Response Sites

1 Table Of Contents  Congressional Requirement  DoD Protocol Objectives, Process, and Activities  DoD American Indian and Alaska Native Consultation  Current DERP Prioritization Policy  Analysis of Existing Methods/Models

2 Congressional Requirement  Section 311 of FY02 Defense Authorization Act –“Develop, in consultation with representatives of the States and Indian Tribes, a proposed protocol for assigning to each defense site a relative priority for response activities related to unexploded ordnance, discarded military munitions, and munitions constituents” “Defense sites” (hereinafter munitions response sites) are locations where a munitions response is needed “Does not include any operational range, operating storage or manufacturing facility, or facility that is used for or was permitted for the treatment or disposal of military munitions” –Issue proposed protocol for public comment by November 30, 2002 –Issue final protocol –Apply to sites in munitions response site inventories

3 *Factors from Section 311 are paraphrased for brevity. Congressional Requirement – Factors to be Considered  In assigning a relative priority to a site, DoD is to “primarily consider factors relating to safety and environmental hazard potential,” such as*: –Presence and types of known or suspected unexploded ordnance, discarded military munitions, or munitions constituents –Presence/effectiveness of public access controls –Potential/evidence of direct human contact –Status of any response actions –Date for transfer from military control –Extent of documented incidents –Potential for drinking water contamination or release into the air –Potential for destruction of sensitive ecosystems.

4 DoD Objectives  Develop, in consultation with EPA, States, and Indian Tribes, a prioritization protocol for munitions response sites that: –Uses consistent factors, terminology and definitions –Addresses safety, environmental hazards, and other pertinent management factors –Allows for consistent application.  Develop and provide training to DoD personnel on the protocol  Apply to munitions response sites, including sites on Indian lands

5 Consultation with American Indian and Alaska Native Tribes  DoD will consult with tribes whenever tribal interests may be affected by DoD actions –Before proposals are cast in stone –On a government-to-government basis  DoD will undertake actions and manage lands mindful of the special significance that tribes ascribe to certain natural resources and traditional cultural properties

6 Phase 1 – Data Gathering Phase 2 – Develop Proposed Protocol Phase 3 – Review and Comment Phase 4 – Implement Final Protocol JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec Proposed Schedule JanFebMarAprMay

7 Status of activities  Federal, State, Tribal, and Public Input –Federal Register request for information to consider –Letter to Tribal leaders –Letter to States –Briefing the Munitions Response Committee –DENIX Web site –  Analysis of site prioritization methods/models  Initial consideration of factors and definitions

8 Environmental Restoration  Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) addresses –Hazardous substances, –Military munitions and munitions constituents, and –Building demolition/debris removal (BD/DR) at: Active Installations Base Realignment and Closure Program (BRAC) Military installations undergoing closure or alignment, as authorized by Congress in 4 rounds of base closures for 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995 Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) Property transferred from DoD control prior to October 17, 1986 Release occurred prior to October 17, 1986

9 Environmental Restoration  Native American Lands Environmental Mitigation Program (NALEMP) Federally recognized tribes Indian lands & ANCSA conveyed lands Address issues of concern to Native Americans related to environmental restoration

10 Current DERP policy  DoD employs a risk management approach in the DERP that protects human health, safety, and the environment by focusing on actions that reduce risk  Current system for prioritization and sequencing of environmental restoration activities focuses on: –Environmental hazards caused by hazardous substances –Explosive hazards due to the presence of military munitions –Other environmental risks  Many sources of information are used collectively to make decisions about the need for, and the timing of, response actions

11 Munitions on Indian Lands Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Ak Chin Indian Community of the Maricopa Indian Reservation Chemehuevi Indian Tribe Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Crow Creek Sioux Tribe Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe Fort Mojave Indian Tribe Knik Tribe Morongo Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians Native Village of Gambell Native Village of Hooper Bay Native Village of Kotzebue Native Village of Nikolski Native Village of Tyonek Native Village of Unalakleet Oglala Sioux Tribe Organized Village of Kwethluk Pueblo of Acoma Pueblo of Isleta Pueblo of Laguna Pueblo of San Felipe Pueblo of Santa Ana Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe Qagan Tayagungin Tribe of Sand Point Village Qawalangin Tribe of Unalaska Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians San Carlos Apache Tribe Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall Reservation of Idaho Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe Tohono O'odham Nation Tulalip Tribes Walker River Paiute Tribe Yakama Indian Nation Yavapai-Prescott Tribe Tribes reporting munitions response sites:

12 NALEMP Selection Criteria Factors for Prioritizing Funding Decisions  Health, Safety, & Environment –Hazardous substances –Munitions and munitions constituents –Abandoned structures and debris  Lifeways –Impacts and access to traditional and subsistence items  Economic (future land use) –Access to natural resources for commercial use –Access to land for development  Programmatic –Impacts to Tribal Programs –Leveraging Opportunities

13 Comparison of prioritization factors in Section 311 and the DERP Mgmt Guidance Section 311(b) –Potential for drinking water contamination or the release of munitions constituents –Known, versus suspected, UXO, discarded military munitions, or munitions constituents –Potential for direct human contact –Whether the public has access to the site –Whether a response action has been or is being undertaken –Planned or mandated dates for transfer –Potential for destruction of sensitive ecosystems/damage to natural resources –Extent of any documented incidents involving UXO, discarded military munitions, or munitions constituents Management Guidance –Relative-Risk - Drinking Water and Air Pathways –RAC - Type of Ordnance –RAC - Area, Extent, and Accessibility –Standing commitments –Community reuse requirements –Short- and long-term ecological effects and environmental impacts –Site-specific health, safety, or ecological risk assessments or evaluations –Stakeholder concerns –Reasonably anticipated future land use –Implementation and execution considerations –Availability of technology to detect, discriminate, recover, and destroy munitions –Program goals and initiatives –Cultural, social and economic factors Most factors in Section 311 address concepts included in DoD’s current guidance. Prioritization factors from each are shown below and common concepts are highlighted. Common Factors Factors in one list but not the other Prioritization Protocol

14 Summary  DoD is developing a protocol for prioritizing action at munitions response sites  DoD is actively seeking input from EPA, other agencies, States, Tribes, and the public  DoD will publish the proposed protocol for public comment by 30 November 2002

15 Discussion: Ways to Participate  We encourage you to participate in developing the protocol –Personal Point of Contact — Patricia Ferrebee, Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations & Environment)/Cleanup Office 703/ United States Department of Defense Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations & Environment)/Cleanup ATTN: Proposed Site Prioritization Protocol 3400 Defense Pentagon Washington, D.C –Stakeholder Working Group — Munitions Response Committee –Web Site — –Other? How would you like to participate? Please tell us what you think.