UTILIZATION OF A TECHNICAL PEER REVIEW TO SUPPORT THE MISSION OFTHE NEVADA TEST SITE COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD

摘要

The U. S. Department of Energy's (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration NevadaOperations Office (NNSA/NV) Environmental Management (EM) Underground Test Area(UGTA) project addresses the characterization and needs for long-term monitoring of thesubsurface contamination resulting from 828 underground nuclear weapon tests at the NevadaTest Site (NTS). EM promotes, and is required, to include stakeholders in its program.However, UGTA is a very complex program not easily understood by members of the public.The NTS Community Advisory Board (CAB), a federally chartered Site Specific AdvisoryBoard (SSAB), has studied the UGTA project since 1996, and has found it a challenge tocompletely comprehend and provide NNSA/NV meaningful citizen input. The CAB realized thebenefit of a technical peer review and in 2000 recommended to NNSA/NV that a peer review ofthe UGTA strategy would provide valuable feedback to the program to address undergroundcontamination at the NTS. NNSA agreed to the CAB's recommendation, and moved forwardwith a scope of work to have the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) performthe peer review of the UGTA strategy. The ASME began the peer review in June 2001, and theirfinal report was published in November 2001. In January 2002, the CAB devoted their monthlymeeting in Las Vegas, Nevada to reporting the results of the peer review of the UGTA strategyto the public. Two public workshops were later held in the community of Amargosa, Nevadaduring the month of January to help educate and build interest in the CAB February 2002monthly meeting which was also held in Amargosa. The CAB recommendation to NNSA toutilize a technical peer review has provided valuable information to NNSA, the State of Nevada,and the CAB. At other DOE sites SSABs are challenged by a number of complex, technicalprograms requiring considerable time and resources for the board to comprehend. It is worthconsidering the utilization of an independent, technical peer review to help provide credible andinvaluable feedback for both DOE sites and stakeholders.