The process defined is useful and worthwhile. But the decision to initiate should be
made much earlier, e.g., at F&H should this process have begun when the basins were
closed? You need to look at higher risk sites. Timing is off for F&H; should pick another
project that isn't as far along. We're spending short dollars on this and not doing
something else. Look at another project; concentrate effort on highest risk project (TRU
waste, DWPF). Process is good.
The problem of DOE is credibility. If this process will improve DOE credibility and will
generate credibility with public, then you should do it.
Why wasn't a Chemical Engineer on your standards teams? A Chemical
Engineer needs to be involved in the water treatment unit process.
The Environmental Engineer on the standards team is knowledgeable of
processes used for groundwater remediation.
Written Question (on Meeting Comment Card)
Will process ultimately result in a needed overhaul of DOE Orders?
In parallel to the efforts in development of the Necessary and Sufficient
standards Closure Process, DOE is also re-evaluating and upgrading the current
Orders. Newly revised Orders will more clearly delineate the policies,
requirements and guidelines to facilitate more efficient implementation by the
field. While the Necessary and Sufficient Closure Process allows application of
the most appropriate standards (based on the hazards and activities) to provide
adequate protection of the public, workers, and the environment, the new Orders
will be available and may be used where deemed appropriate by the team of