IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envman/v59y2017i3d10.1007_s00267-016-0798-8.html

A Methodology to Evaluate Ecological Resources and Risk Using Two Case Studies at the Department of Energy’s Hanford Site

Author

Listed:
  • Joanna Burger

    (Rutgers University, Division of Life Sciences
    Vanderbilt University, Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP))

  • Michael Gochfeld

    (Vanderbilt University, Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP)
    Rutgers, robert Wood Johnson Medical School)

  • Amoret Bunn

    (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory)

  • Janelle Downs

    (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory)

  • Christian Jeitner

    (Rutgers University, Division of Life Sciences
    Vanderbilt University, Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP))

  • Taryn Pittfield

    (Rutgers University, Division of Life Sciences
    Vanderbilt University, Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP))

  • Jennifer Salisbury

    (Vanderbilt University, Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP))

  • David Kosson

    (Vanderbilt University, Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP))

Abstract

An assessment of the potential risks to ecological resources from remediation activities or other perturbations should involve a quantitative evaluation of resources on the remediation site and in the surrounding environment. We developed a risk methodology to rapidly evaluate potential impact on ecological resources for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Hanford Site in southcentral Washington State. We describe the application of the risk evaluation for two case studies to illustrate its applicability. The ecological assessment involves examining previous sources of information for the site, defining different resource levels from 0 to 5. We also developed a risk rating scale from non-discernable to very high. Field assessment is the critical step to determine resource levels or to determine if current conditions are the same as previously evaluated. We provide a rapid assessment method for current ecological conditions that can be compared to previous site-specific data, or that can be used to assess resource value on other sites where ecological information is not generally available. The method is applicable to other Department of Energy’s sites, where its development may involve a range of state regulators, resource trustees, Tribes and other stakeholders. Achieving consistency across Department of Energy’s sites for valuation of ecological resources on remediation sites will assure Congress and the public that funds and personnel are being deployed appropriately.

Suggested Citation

  • Joanna Burger & Michael Gochfeld & Amoret Bunn & Janelle Downs & Christian Jeitner & Taryn Pittfield & Jennifer Salisbury & David Kosson, 2017. "A Methodology to Evaluate Ecological Resources and Risk Using Two Case Studies at the Department of Energy’s Hanford Site," Environmental Management, Springer, vol. 59(3), pages 357-372, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:envman:v:59:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s00267-016-0798-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s00267-016-0798-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00267-016-0798-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00267-016-0798-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:envman:v:59:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s00267-016-0798-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.