ML17276B145

Forwards marked-up Maps & Supplemental Info Re Arid Lands Ecology Reserve (Ale).Ale Makes Up 120 Square Miles of Hanford Natl Environ Research Park.Oversized Map Encl. Aperture Card Available in PDR

ML17276B145
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	03/01/1982
From:	Ransom H ENERGY, DEPT. OF
To:	Rolonda Jackson Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8203150058
Download: ML17276B145 (36)

Text

REGULATORY INl- HAT ION DISTRIBUTION SYSTE R IDS)

Y 1 ACCESSION NBR'8203150058 DOC>>DATE 82/03/01 NOTARIZED! NO DOCKET FACIL:50-397 NPPSS Nuclear ProJecti Unit 2< washington )Public Powe 05000397 AUTH,NAHE AUTHOR AFFILIATION RANSOHJH ~ E>>

RECIP ~ NAHE Energy< Dept'f RECIPIENT AF F IL'IATION JAGKSONPR ~ Geosciences Branch I V '

SUBJECT:

For wards marked up maps K supplemental info re ar i,d,l ands ecology reserve (ALE).ALE makes up 120.,square piles of Hanford Natl Environ Research f'ark.Oversized map card available in PDR. encl'perture DISTRISUTION CODE: C0088 TITLE: Environ. Comments.

COPIES 'RECEIVED:LTR . L ENCL J SI2E: >>L-L =

NOTES:2 copies al 1 matl:PH>> 1~~~ +~P 70 Zion A,V8-~44 05000397 RECIP IENT COP IFS RECIPIENT COPIES ID CODE/NAHE LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAHE LYTR ENCL LIC BR 02 BC 06 7 f7 NL: ANL 1 1 AULUCKPR ~ 01 1 INTERNAL ELD 1 0 IE 13 1 1 NRR/DE/AEAB 20 1 1 NRR/DE/EEB 16 1 1 NRR/DE/HGEB '21 1 1 NRR/DE/SAB 18 1 1 NRR/DS I/AEB 19 1 1 ETSB 15 1 1

NRR/DSI/RAB 17 1 1 BEG F IL "04 1 RGN5 1 1 EXTERNAL>> ACRS 1 0 LPDR 03 NATL LAB '21 5 5 NRC PDR 02 NSIC 05 1 1 NTIS 3P 3P

'TOTAL NUHBER OF COPIES REQUIRED: LTTR ~ ENCL

0

~ 11 w

V I tl 1

V 1.

Department of Energy Richland Operations Office P.O. Box 550 Richland, Washington 99352 p' uw > ~982 Mr. Bob Jackson, Geosciences Branch Division of Engineering U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Jackson:

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S ARID LANDS ECOLOGY RESERVE In response to your recent telephone conversati on with Paula Clark, two maps are enclosed showing the location of the Arid Lands Ecology (ALE) Reserve.

A fact sheet and some supplemental information (Congressional testimony) on the history, nature and value of the ALE Reserve, are also enclosed.

Briefly, the ALE Reserve is an area of 120 square mi les included within the 570 square miles of the Hanford National Environmental Research Park (NERP) and provides the protected landscape necessary for long-term ecological research. One of the primary aims of the ALE site is to preserve remnants of native vegetation for ecological study and as a reference point for judging long-term, slowly paced vegetational changes that are not attributed to the activities of man. For this reason, policies for the ALE Reserve are more restrictive than those for other parts of the Hanford NERP.

I hope this informati on meets your need..

Very truly yours, H, E. Ransom, Director EPD:PKC Energy Programs Division Encl os ures: oo>

1. Hanford boundary map 2.

3.

4.

USGS map Fact sheet Testimony of Burton E. Vaughan r/

ggwO Pj )gg~AH'avo

'.A:

8203i50058 820301 "PDR;, ADOCK. 05000397-.

PDR

a s I

l 1

'< 'I

~ >

~ 0 l"

D 4 l

4

R. 23 E. R. 24 E. R. 25 E. R. 26 R. 7 .28 I

WAN M AM G R AN T C OU N TY CT)

I- I- 'Ctsr o TAUHTON OTHELLO I Z 'NOUN r

ADA M S CIO.

AH IIHC AL scrlrloL c5 CAS CANC I E

SCLHTTCHCT rSSS SIPfHW TY Lw STAT NI CN WAY t4 MATTAWA t4 R. E E

~ ~ 41 4 ~ DR I HAHLurf ÃAHCH HIT 8LU FF NIC NNAY

~ IIIDCE t4 o" PRIES'T

~ GR API DAM PEG 4 Ira AY Y A KIIIMA SUBSTATION BPA)

F R IAINIK L I IN IO Ul 0 U N'TIY I MESA I 'ANFORD YAKIMA REE

~ GGE D RRICA CREE 4444 1

E E

TYTTHIPLCS CAST P P CANAL E E e ENT N T Y E

I WPPSS WYE BARR ICADE 8

5 )4I5 2I I '

TO r tB! 9 10 II I I2 p. (4+ PIIDPDSED EN FRANKLIN IB l7,;I6 15 '4 l3 OAM l9 20<>>,2I 22 23I24 E FFTF I ~

P

~

EI 50I29I28I27 26 25 I I I 3I 52ISS 34 55I56 RAPIDS I ONE RSON DAM t4 I

~GD R E G G D I I, I HO R IH ICHLAND WAHLUKE SLOPE 89,592 I l39 SO.MI.) )

SUN NYSI OE BENTDN coUNTY 270,675I425 54.MI)

WEST R>>CHLAHO TOTALS Seo,oer Iee2 sa. ML P

G E

'I CRANOYIEw I EE ~ RR NER I E j E GEO RR J ~ l PROSSER KENNEWICK UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HANFORD HANFORD WORKS BOUNDARY MAP BOUNDARY QI I J LEAn8$ 4 4 ~ ' P ~ ~ RE C3 PC ~ qo<PT LLCSCI DIC o .LI IIOI GEGPl~ DPI (BoEP nd o I'g RE% 'GILA 'GL>>4 , 4 E ~

Arid Lands Ecol o y 'eserve 'ALE)

Location: Hanford site, Benton County, Washington Size: 120 square miles in the Rattlesnake Hills Land use: Energy research and development, ecological research Desi gnati ons:

1. Rattlesnake Hills Research Natural Area, 1971, Interagency Agreement (Department of Agriculture, Department of Interior, Atomic Energy Commission)

2. Arid Lands Ecology Reserve, 1976, Atomic Energy Commission

3. National Environmental Research Park, 1977, Energy Research and Development Administration (includes ALE as well as the remainder of the Hanford site, except exclusion areas)

4. Experimental Ecological Reserve, 1976, Institute of Ecology (National Science Foundation)

Threated species on ALE; Animals: Long-billed curlew Burrowing owl Golden eagle Desert night snake Prairie falcon Whip snake Swainson's hawk Plants: Rosy Balsamroot (Balsamorhiza rosea)

(There are additional threatened or endangered species, including the bald eagle, on the remainder of NERP.)

l1anagement: The ALE Reserve is 'under the Jurisdiction of the Richland Operations Offi ce, Department of Energy. Battelle Memorial Institute, 'as DOE contractor for operation of the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (DE-AC06-76RL01830), has been assigned management of the Reserve.

~ ~

~

~ ~

Testimony of Burton E. IIaughan, July 28, 1977, before the House Sub-committee on Environment and Atmosphere, Committee on Science and Tech-nology, U.S. House of Representatives, the Honorable George E. Brown presiding.

<<I <<'~ l<<*l1 I<<

I

<<, I << If 1

l C ~

5 Nr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee:

I have been asked to give my views on several questions relating to operation of the National Environmental Research Park (NERP) at Hanford, Washington (1). Although Hanford's NERP was dedicated in March 1977, major elements of the NERP Program have been in place for over a decade. The pro-gram has even earlier antecedents; therefore, I would like to outline briefly our experience and events leading to dedication of Hanford's NEPP.

BACKGROUND ON THE PACIFIC NORTH!(EST LABORATORY Hanford's NERP is administered, of course, by the ERDA, with its prin-cipal research programs conducted by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory operated by Battelle f'iemorial Institute. I am an employee. of Battelle, with management responsibility for all programs in the ecological sciences (2). Beyond the

. programs I represent, PNL is a multiprogram national laboratory, employing about 2,000 people. Ecological sciences programs are funded principally by ERDA's Division of Biomedical and Environmental Research, although we also do u(ork for other ERDA components and some other agencies. Programs in the ecological sciences support about 120 scientists and technicians, with 40Ã of the effort directly or indirectly related to the Hanford site. Several of our staff came to Hanford over 30 years ago when AEC's plutonium production plant was first established. Despite an initially nuclear orientation, an understanding of arid lands ecology grew out of these long associations with

'the Hanford region.

Primary concern, historically, was to document organisms in food chains that might lead to man and to determine radioactivity contamination levels .

In developing the data base for fish, plants, wildlife and other biota, concern soon shifted to other consequences of large-scale landscape inter-ference, for example possible impacts on the Columbia River salmon fishery caused by discharge of chemicals and heat from the nuclear reactors. I

.,believe it .important to note that. in 1951, our fishery ecologists -recognized other reactor residuals- as having far greater potential for. causing environ-

>rental:.damage than did radioactivity -itself (3): -Consequently-;-several long=

term ecological monitoring programs were established that helped substantially to develop at- Hanford a nuclear industry -which was. comparatively free of environmental problems. Let me give you-.one small but straightforward

'example-:

For 25 years, we measured nesting conditions and reproductive success of the Canada goose on islands in the Columbia River at Hanford (Figure 1). This is still an important breeding location on the flyway for spring and fall migrations of the geese. As nine plutonium weapons reactors started up, reaching peak operation from 1944 to 1956, goose breeding was maintained--the concern was that subtle impairment of the food base on which the nesting geese depended might have occurred indirectly as a 'consequence either of reactor operations or nuclear fuel reprocessing activities. No such thing occurred, although several years after the last reactors were shut down several declines in Canada goose population were noted. These declines, occurring as they did after weapons reactor operation ceased, were traced to two extraneous factors; II

~ ~

H SUCCESSFUL TOTAL NO COYOTE CONTROL RECREATlONAL ACCESS 100 z

UJ C) z 50 0

56 58 -=

60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 I YEARS NO. OF

'7 8, 8 8 9 6; . 3 I 1 I 1 1 REACTORS FIGURE 1. Number of Canada Goose Hests-Established On Island 6 (Locke Island)

Hanford Reservation and The Humber of Successful Hests, 1953-197?.

~ ~ ~

namely, the opening of formerly restricted river locations to recreational boating and the suppression of long-practiced measures to control coyote popu-lations (Figure 1). Out of this long-term monitoring effort two lessons were learned: 1) there is usually a basis for establishing cause of environmental impact, and 2) negative data as to another, presumptive cause 'of impact can be extremely useful. These points will be true only if the ecological monitoring project was properly. designed at the outset and a good background of informa-tion had been amassed about ecological relationships of other organisms. For the=example:given=, my-predecessors:.foresight:in:.looking:beyond:narrow, immedi;

,-ate-concerns , -and--the=long=.term.-continu.ity:of:effort:set:-the-stage-for:pro------

perrly:attributing-consequences-of- other:,:unrelated:developments~.

('

ARID-LANDS:ECOLOGY-RESERVE::-RELATION-TO-OTHER:NATIONAL--SITES  :.:  :--::= i With the above example in mind, I would like to turn, now, to consid-eration of the Arid Lands Ecology (ALE) Reserve. This is an area of 120 square miles included within the 570 square miles of the Hanford NERP (4).

The ALE Reserve comprises the watershed area along the western border of the Hanford site frorg the top of Rattlesnake Hills (3,500 ft) to the valley floor (500 ft). It is an island of natural vegetation surrounded by expanses of cultivated field under dryland or irrigated management regimes,.on the south-west side, and the Hanford nuclear facilities on the northeast side (Figure 2).

In several ways the ALE Reserve is the forerunner of our present NERP. It was set aside 10 years ago by administrative decisions" of the local office of AEC, now ERDA, in Richland, Washington. An important consideration at the time was to provide buffer area for the nuclear fuel reprocessing plant such that grazing. and agricultural encroachment on the Hanford site would be minimized.

This consideration coincided fortuitously with desires of our research spon-sors to more systematically categorize this desert shrub-steppe ecosystem, common to a substantial part of the arid West where the AEC had many of its facilities. With support from the local office, steps were taken to map, fence, and patrol the ALE Reserve. Key elements of understanding were:

~ Pristine locations'ithin the Reserve would be preserved indefinitely o Other sites within the Reserve would be dedicated for manipulative research activities Outside university participation would be encouraged in the =research program o Casual access would be strictly controlled.

(For any part of the landscape to be pristine, in 1968, was something of a geological and climatic accident--the weather generally was too hostile for early Washington settlers to be attracted to'this'site.)

In 1971, the Arid Land Ecology Reserve also became the Rattlesnake Hills Research Natural Area, as part of a five-agency Federal cooperative agreement.

A--key.-element:.:in that-.designation-was-the--idea- of.. preserviiig. undisturbed s-i-tes

<and:the'.ge'ne pools -represented by all -types of organisms "found.-riaturally at-JI l

~ ~

- lI j5'2'4 P.~

5(50(5 4044(ll ~ 5 r

~ ~ ~ w ~

l P

.J" I

p!

eisa

/ W4IT( S(4(IS I

I I 5

S(0(( 04(T( P' m='

L. Sl s(5

~ 'P

'P 500 Il ll(l 500 5 ll(l x$Q.; (

~ '(l'l0 044(5 ~

I ~

I /q / r

~ ~ I

~ ~

- ~ \gtl I'

butts( 44(I(IS t( ~ Pl(5

y. /! ~

~ lst(CT l(5 4( ~ 004(lt(ls

~ '

I '.

'p ~ 5 P

\ I,I P I'~(

~ \ ~ '- ,I P

~

( ~

I r I;

j I I( I I

C-

~ 5 ll(4(I~ 0 FIGURE 2. The Hanford llational Environmental Research Park

0 V

those sites, especially rare and endangered or threatened types (5). These goals were consistent with the prior intent in establishing large segments of the ALE Reserve. In 1977, Dr. Jerry Franklin, of the U.S. Department of Agriculture examined suitable sites over the whole of the U.S. for the Bio-sphere Reserve Program (Figure 3) (6). He stated that..."It was seldom possible to identify a single area that satisfied all criteria--a large, strictly preserved tract for conservation of a full array of organisms with a substantial history of research and monitoring and potential for major experi-mental treatments. (The'nly area that is clearly of this type is the Arid Lands Ecology Reserve at Hanford, Washington)..." To my best knowledge, ERDA has not yet nominated the ALE Reserve for inclusion in the Biosphere Reserve Program. However, the stated objectives of the Biosphere Reserve Program are fully congruent with those in effect on the ALE Reserve, as-a-8egregated portgon:of=she-jjdnjord:IIERp e-:should=note:that:policies:for the ALEo G.n Reser ve=are=m ore=restricti ve:tha n t hosef or- other pa-rt s of:the H-anford: HERP<.

HOW DO RE UIREMENTS OF A BIOSPHERE RESERYE DIFFER FROM THOSE OF THE HANFORD HERP?

I The ALE Reserve at Hanford fulfills the three main objectives of the Biosphere Reserve .Program: 1) conservation of unique landscape elements,

2) a place where long-term ecological monitoring and research are in progress, and 3) education. Excluded:on-the-ALE:Reserve:are-those:large:-scale:land interventions which:Aould:permanently-alter:its-charact~er. Manipulative

~

research is conducted at the ALE site--what the ecologists term "modulation" experiments. These experiments may involve overhead spraying, controlled cattle grazing, stream modification and other procedures whose effects are generally reversible. The extent and location of such experiments are further controlled, with buffer areas also provided. In this way, modulation experi-ments do not impinge on the areas designated for long-term preservation as required for our status as a Federal Research Natural Area, or as would be required for the Biosphere Reserve Program.

'n=contrast:to-the-ALE-Reserve the-larger-Hanford:site:(HERP).:includes areas:Where-there:exi.st:neH-fac:i.i-ities-for-comiiiercial:nuclear-electric-po>ver generation ,the:Federal=nuclear produc".ion:and:reprocessing-plants ,and:other high-technol'ogy-developments. Huge stretches of the 570 square mile NERP site also remain comparatively undisturbed. To date, possible radiological emis-sions from the nuclear fhcilities have. been very tightly controlled so that measurable environmental impact of radiation has neither been expected nor has

~ ever been detected. Also, operation of these facilities has been remarkably free from other adverse ecological impact on this region; e.g., thermal efflu-ent discharges from the nuclear reactors. Nevertheless, it would be inappro-priate for the eniize Hanford NERP to be dedicated as a Biosphere Reserve.

Only the ALE Reserve should be so dedicated. In my judgment, large sections of the present Hanford NERP can be used for clean technologies, like the nuclear facilites, whose operation is unlikely to significantly impact natural ecosystems. On the other hand, some different technologies could be inappro-priate and might lead to long-term deterioration of the ALE Reserve. Studies in our laboratory and elseIrhere. indicate, for example', that long-term operation C

P as ~

- x v ~

t ~

,V

~ ~

~ ~

FIGURE 3. Location of Presently Established (dots) Biosphere Reserves.

Reproduced with Permission of Science 195:263; .1977.

0 ll

~r of large-scale coal-fired steam electric plants. might cause impairment in organic productivity (7) . To date, I am unaware of any defini te policies as to type of technology to be allowed on the Hanford NERP. We shall probably have to pay close attention to this matter in future developments.

Many ecologists believe that one of the most useful indicators of bio-logical potential of land is the mosaic of natural plant communities that occur with changes in el.evation, topography, and soil substrates. Eight major plant communities have been characterized on the Hanford NERP. All are represented within the ALE Reserve'except streamside communities, which lie along the Columbia River shore (4). The streamside communities provide principal habitat for many of the large animals of the Hanford NERP, and they are not currently in a protected status like that of the ALE Reserve. As s'everal such sites lie outside areas corrmitted to technology development', they should, in my view, be accorded Reserve status and be preserved indefinitely;

. e.g., White Bluffs and'Old Hanford Townsite.

Apart from classification of the plant communities as indicated above, several other important classes of information are needed. These are needed also under the Biosphere Reserve concept, in order to use data effectively for baseline (reference) purposes. These ancillary needs have beep met to a large extent on the ALE Reserve (5). Specifically, soil has been typed, chemically characterized and mapped; microclimatic variations have been measured and mapped over the past decade; an accurate history of prior disturbance has been established; vertebrate and, to a lesser extent, invertebrate fauna have been characterized; and the geology of the site has been established. Of these features, perhaps most useful to the ecologist nas been the microclimatic mapping (8) and soil characterization (5) made possible by cooperating members from atmospheric sciences and soil science departments of the Pacific North-west Laboratory. Where possible, baseline research as envisioned under the Biosphere Reserve concept can be greatly strengthened if there exists nearby multidiscipline capability, which may be called upon to put together an integrated team.

Below I have summarized objectives as outlined to us in the directive establishing the Hanford NERP, by Dr. James A. Liverman, Assistant Adminis-trator for Environment and Safety,'RDA. Of the 12 objectives specified, the 7 starred objectives are well underway on the ALE Reserve and are appropriate to that location. Four of the remaining 5 objectives are more appropriately carried out at other locations within the Hanford NERP. In .particular, demonstrations of alternative uses of land seem to me inappropriate for the ALE Reserve, or, for a Biosphere Reserve.

R R ~ ~

I il '

I,i ~ k R

NERP OBJECTIVES A. Establishing Baselines

• Characterize landscape components

• Establish field laboratory repositories ("preserves") for seedstock, plant types, and communities of organisms

• Develop quantitative methodology for measuring population and system changes Compile the ecological data base ("data center"); monitor for long-term changes B. Determining Response to Man-made Disturbance

• Manipulate ecosystems in designed experiments

• Measure successional events, changes in habitat, or loss of key species Study multiple interaction events; e.g., chemical stressors acting on the environment C. Predicting Systems Change

• Build models for organizing knowledge of local ecosystems Develop estimation techniques for assessing effects in absence of full-life history on key organisms Correlate successional events with residuals affecting the ecosystem I D. Demonstrating Environmental Management Principles Develop areas to publically demonstrate the long-term ameli-

'ration of ecological effects with costs of alternative options Demonstrate alternate uses of land llHAT ARE THE MAJOR PROBLEMS IN PROTECTING THE LAND?

In developing the ALE Reserve, we have found five points to be very important; o Geographical Identity - this should also be ecologically meaningful, e.g., a natural watershed area o Buffer Zones o Special Policy on Fire Control e (Strict) Use Control Policy f,

e Aerial Surveillance and Patrol,

The idea of a Biosphere Reserve requires policing to ensure both the security of preservation areas and the integrity of ex'perimental sites. This can be a very complicated problem since each of the points above are at times related. However, we have found that an aerial patrol flying 5 to 7 days per week maintains adequate policing, with only rare need for foot patrol or armed patrol.

Persistent pressures at Hanford have come from cattlemen and hunters who cut our fences to trespass, and from myriad civic groups wanting to use the ALE Reserve for their own purposes (hiking, photography, garden clubs, school outings, etc.). A fenced area, by itself, is little assurance against tres-pass, particularly if the region has no distinct geographical identity. If the area is large, as is the ALE Reserve (120 square miles), then the addi-tional problem of patrolling can be unreasonably expensive unless means more efficient than foot patrol are used. There are also other disadvantages to foot patrols because we have to maintain a delicate balance between actual force and threat.

"Trespassers are almost always local citizens. If thei'r perception is one of being unfairly or too severely treated for trespass, unfortunate consequences. have been known to occur. Qur fear is of brush fire deliber-ately ignited by an irate citizen--something which has happened across the river outside Hanford often enough to be a constant concern. An aerial patrol avoids confrontations at the same time that it provides visible evi-dence of constant policing. Cattle trespassing through fences deliberately cut constitute special problems; this may be a uniquely Western problem.

Therefore, cattle removal is done 'by a local rancher, under contract to us, who has suitable equipment for this purpose. Since instituting overflights however, this has been a minimal problem. We have maintained over the years records on the'umber of intrusions and our patrol can usually identify vehicles, number of people, and cattle. We find that intrusions decline in proportion to the number of'eekly overflights.

'he matter of buffer zones can be difficult. Here, again, we are mainly concerned about fire. We have dealt with this problem with the help of the local ERDA office. ERDA has facilitated exchanges of small parcels'f land such that a dry-land wheat farmer now owns most of the land along the long southwest border of the ALE Reserve. Since the farmer's own interests are at stake we have a common reason to exclude trespassers--he protects us on the south as. we protect him on the north. The arrangement has been quite practical.

Civic groups and others wanting recreational use of the ALE Reserve have been controlled by having a firmly declared policy specifying the purposes for which people may enter the ALE Reserve.

Bas.ical-ly-,-access:to:the:ALE:Reserve is-restricted:to al:1:but-persons engaged:in:bonaMide:scientific-work-and:ma-intena'nce:personnel:properly

'instructed:as:to disturbing-the-land. Additionally, in the interest of good 10

public relationships, we admit other visitors from time to time on a per-sonally escorted basis. Since such visits-can, significantly tie up the time of our scientific staff, we try to keep them confined to one or two times each year. Visitors must be escorted, in our experience, otherwise rather ill-considered actions sometimes follow; e.g., killing snakes, digging holes (which may act as pit-traps), disturbing instrumentation arrays, et'c.

For remaining portions of the Hanford NERP, apart from the ALE Reserve, we believe a similar use policy can be implemented. This matter is currently under discussion with the local ERDA office and will be resolved shortly.

One point to keep in mind, however, is that there needs to be clear under-standing about landlord responsibility when. extramural people use the NERP.

Not all areas of the Hanford NERP lie within Battelle's contractual responsi-bility to ERDA. Those areas may remain the responsibility of ERDA or of another contractor.

A remaining matter of policy concerns firefighting practice. This has been troublesome, over .the years, as regards preservation of pristine sites swithin the ALE Reserve. Firefighting practice is usually decided by a fire department in biosphere reserve locations. Firefighting practices should be

~

reviewed and they should reflect particular geographic and ecological con-siderations. At Hanford, for example, past experience has shown that fires at elevations above 1,200 feet on the ALE Reserve have very little lasting impact on vegetation and wildlife. However, the bulldozer marks and new roadways constructed during firefighting operations leave tracks'n the landscape that persist for decades. With due regard to potential harm to government property and personnel, we believe that fires as they occur above 1,200 feet should be controlled at the 1,200 foot road and 'along the outer boundaries of the .

Reserve; i.e. no equipment should leave the existing roads. Also plain water and not borate should be used when spray planes are require'd.

WHAT HAS TO BE DONE TO ENSURE LONG-RANGE'CIENTIFIC INTEGRITY OF THE NERP?

In answer to this question, I see four goals that still need to be met at Hanford, for example:

1, 'Objectives for different regions of the NERP must be clarified and delineated.

2. policy for technology facilities built on the NERP must be established on a compatible basis with preservation objectives.

3. Legislation is needed to clarify the legal and administrative status of the NERP.

4. Provision must be made for long-term ecological monitoring.

The first goal deals with both scientific and technological issues, at Hanford. It is clear that preservation objectives and the construction of a technology facility are not mutually compatible on the same square mile piece of real estate. Our industrial sponsors frequently misunderstand this point, if only because local impacts may be slow in appearing or because they may be partially ameliorated by special effort. The Hanford NERP, as discussed at an earlier point, is actually large enough to accommodate both objectives, pro-vided they are situated at appropriate locations. At least that has been our experience with the nuclear energy. facilities. The second goal is related and was also discussed at an earlier point. What is to prevent the future decision to install perhaps 3,600 MW 'of generating capacity using coal-fired steam electric plants on the large Hanford site? Both fossil and nuclear energy development responsibilities rest with different components of ERDA.

In my judgement such a decision could have real ecological impact in an area that presently meets EPA's stringent air and water quality standards, an area

'hat shows no significant environmental impact from nuclear facilities. When a unique ecological reserve exists, as it does here, meeting all criteria for

,a biosphere reserve, it would seem to serve ERDA's best interests to on the Hanford NERP to clean technologies. In my opinion, this restrict'evelopment ought to be a matter of declared agency policy.

On the third goal, Isabel-ieve:that:l,ong-range:integri-ty-i.s-tied:closely to the:fate-of-'the-present=ALE=Reserve , 'which-is already-dedicated=to=Biosphere>

Reserve:Program-objecti.ves. If the Reserve is to serve for baseline monitor-ing purposes, against which we may gauge landscape changes at similar dis-turbed sites nearby, then it requires a stronger degree of protection than is presently within ERDA's or Battelle's capacity to ensure.

As I stated earlier, the ALE Reserve was originally set aside as a buffer zone for the nuclear reprocessing plant. While we have enjoyed full support from ERDA, and AEC before it, to maintain integrity of the Reserve, its legal status is unclear so long as it remains solely a matter of agency declaration. If, for example, the nuclear waste materials buried at the Hanford site were removed to another location, I doubt that ERDA could with-stand pressures from urban and agricultural "interests to convert to other land use. Several years ago, for example, we were forced to allow use of three or four thousand acres of land on the northwest corner of the ALE Reserve by a vintner, for-growing grapes. Recently, the regional cattlemen's association has requested that ERDA allow grazing on portions of the ALE Reserve during the recent northwest drought, Also recently', we have had requests to allow off-road'ehicles to use the Reserve, and we have had tres-pass by unauthorized persons from a commercial land development firm who were scouting for water on the Reserve. While I believe such requests would be declined by ERDA, they are indicative of public pressure.

Hore=ditficult=to=deal=wi.th=are=interagency=-pressures~ The General.

Services Administration (GSA) several years ago insisted on the sale of a strip of land on the southeast border of the ALE Reserve, which ERDA had been regularly leasing to a dry-land wheat, farmer as a buffer zone. Eventu-ally, this piece of land was ceded to the Washington State Department of 12

Fish and Game, who in turn leased it to the County of Benton for use by recreational vehicles. The potential for uncontrollable brush fires was so great that the State eventually agreed to rescind its agreement with the County, after strong argument by our staff. This land would have been it if had remained under ERDA control; however, the concept of such z better'anaged buffer zone was not recognized by GSA. In another matter pending, Bonneville.

Power Administration has asked for a power transmission strip along the southwest border of the 'ALE Reserve. The strip would impact 50 acres of a bitterbrush-sagebrush plant community only 100 acres in extent on the ALE Reserve. While there are other bitterbrush locations on the Hanford NERP, they lie in areas not subject to preservation objectives. Me, of course, lose any time another agency compares its cost/benefit data. For example detouring a power line, against our 15-year research costs reckoned propor-tional to 100 acres out of 77,000 acres. In this way, the Reserve could be readily nibbled away, 5,000 acres at a time! On the la'rger Hanford NERP, similar problems often have been faced. ERDA has had to give up portions of Mahluke Slope, on the north, to the Bureau of Reclamation; and other areas, on the northeast, to the Mashington State Department of Fish and Game. These slope areas were part of the natural watershed shown in Figure 2, In my judgment, management by the other agencies of these areas, adjacent to Hanford NERP has been considerably less than satisfactory. Richland Operations Office of ERDA should be consulted on details, but my examples are suffici-ently indicative of the problem of dealing with other 'Federal agencies.

Because of these problems, primarily, I believe a legislative mandate is necessary to assure long-term integrity of the NERP sites.

Remaining. matters- possibly-affecting -.legal-.status:of. the Hanford-NERP concern-unused- easements--arid-mineral -rights. These are matters which also should be discussed with the ERDA's Richland Operations Office. I am not aware of any such rights. presently outstanding on the ALE Reserve, but it is not clear how the rest of the Hanford NERP may be affected. In any event, rights such as these may be appropriately negotiated or purchased outright by the government, if any remain outstanding. Such rights would not appear to or other biosphere

'stand in the way of legislatively establishing the NERP reserves.

Since a NERP has different objectives than a national park--objectives vIhich lie close to those'or a biosphere reserve--it'.is .important the tone-

term ecol.ogi'cal-hionitoring'rograms be establ.ished, as indicated above as the fourth goal. This was done many years ago at the Hanford NERP. However, it is- becoming progressively difficult-to continue these. kinds of effort as pressures within- ERDA tend towards a .narrow .appl.ication. focus--for the research

-programs-. .:As -discussed earlier, one 'such -study, on the Canada. goose-, proved

'valuable-in-documenting-the -preservation of .normal environmental quality.

during the-years of -nuclear- reactor -operation.-- Other- similar studies -stil-1 underway-are -indicated:below:

13

~ ~

LONG-TERM ECOLOGICAL MONITORING (HANFORD NERP-RELATED ONLY)

STUDIES 25 YEARS AND'OVER Movement of Radiostrontium and Radiocesium in Old Abandoned Fields o Nesting and Reproductivity of Canada Goose e Susceptibility and Virulence Changes in the Synecology of Columnaris.

Disease (Fish) o Succession in Old Fields - Suppression of Alien Weeds and Small Mammals I

STUDIES--5 to 10 YEARS

'o Micrometeorological Mapping of ALE -Reserve o Plant Succession at Burned Sites e Salmon Redd Counts in Columbia River System Under Managed Hydro P'egimes o Baseline Organic Production and Carbon Flow Pathways Before and After Climatic Stress (Desert Steppe-Shrub Ecosystem)

Avian and Raptor, Census o Home Range of Small Animals STUDIES--3 to 5 YEARS Vegetative Recovery After Controlled Grazing o Blue Heron Habitat o Coyote, Mule Deer and Elk--Herd Size and Range

~, t t a'I

~ 4 0

<u- w *"s ~

' 8>>

t I ~ 0 ~

~

0 h The work above represents less than 10% of our research budget in the ecolo-gical sciences, but we are under great pressure to justify its continued existence. Wading--into the Columbia .River-in -hip boots to- sample:fish.for the Columnaris bacterium,-classifying grasshoppers and exotic beetles,--:or

'counting Canada goose -eggs-may- appear--very-frivolous to -the -uninformed-tax=

payer,- to -the- biomedical scientist or to=the engineer on the .technology side Iof-ERDA-.-:-Yet,--I am-sure-,-members of--this- Subcommittee.:will recognize that;

,these procedures may provide. key data for- gauging- the-seriousness-of -envi-

'ronmental.-impact, when-it -occurs.. If NERPs are established by legislation, I then, believe that long-term ecological monitoring should be distinguished from other research needs by similar legislative action.

KINDS OF LONG-RANGE RESEARCH APPROPRIATE TO NERP OBJECTIVES Traditionally, biological scientists have approached effluent releases from a laboratory viewpoint, using selected plant or animal species as biolo-gical indicators, and identifying substrate and tissue concentrations of various materials needed to induce death or impair normal function. This is

. essentially a piecemeal approach, which gives little, if any, information on holistic performance of ecosystems. These approaches, in fact, represent

.the largest portion of present funded work in our laboratories and elsewhere.

Long-term ecological monitoring is needed. Long-term ecological monitoring also needs to be distinguished from monitoring for present licensing requirements for standards of the Environmental Protection Agency.

The latter efforts are not adequate to detect long-range changes. This is obvious by statistical evaluation of current assessment methodology. Certain kinds of adverse impact can be forecasted even for the '10-year, 20-year, or 30-year build-up situation based on modeling and indicators of early response (7). For the energy technologies, lead time is needed to allow modifications.

Ignoring the long-term build-up situation and relying only on present standards could lead to costly retooling, for example with new energy installations. The historical record of Western development amply illustrates this mistake (10).

Pollutants from different sources are often found to cause specific types of damage; e.g., changes due to smelting, urban oxidants, or aluminum ore reduc-tion can be differentiated from'resumptive changes due to coal combustion.

Sampling design is. critical; e.g., dose relationship to plant proximity must be established, in addition to species and specified damage. This is the environmental analogue of epidemiological studies for human health purposes.

Negative data can be extremely valuable for environmental impact judg-ments, out only if scny7ing is carefully designed to test a meaningfu'L nyyo-thesis. Much of current pre- and post-operative monitoring is now discred-ited (9); from the standpoint of statistically controlled design, it is insensitive. Also, the usual question is meaningless: "Is there any effect on the ecosystem?" (there often is, but it may be unimportant). The mean-ingful question depends on knowledge of what is important or unique in a

.particular system--Will the salmon fishery be impacted? Wi 11 grazing pro-ductivity of this grassland be impaired'? Will, an endangered, or threatened 15

0 ~ e species at that site be knocked out? As not all such questions are obvious, one must depend on descriptive ecologists who have strong experience in the region in question.

Methods may require streamlining, based on knowledge of the specific ecosystem; they likely cannot be prescribed generically. Ecolog ists have done a poor job on setting sampling priorities. Also, they have been z equi~ed, too often, to measure too many species, construct insensitive diversity indices, and follow sampling designs that are inadequate. In a terrestrial environment, it may be far more important to get a handle on an important habitat change, or on primary productivity; in an aquatic environment, it may be more important to track the life history.and reproductive success of only one or two valued species. In both cases, measurements should be followed on an adequate statistical basis over a substantial period of time; e.g., 5 to 10 years, including several preoperational sampling years. Some-of:the='most valuable data:for:impact=assessment=purposes=have-represented comparativel-y

'simple:determinations-:carried=on=for:as:--long-as:25:years>

In terrestrial ecosystems, we currently need to know whether greatly increased burdens of airborne metals and organic compounds anticipated with the development of coal technology will lead to slow deterioration of forest, agricultural, or other terrestrial productivity. Predictive modeling is needed, not as an end in itself, but rather as an adjunct for evaluating the importance of individual organism sensitivity to projected burdens (plant, animal, or microbial), For definitive answers, landscape "manipulations" are required that may involve experimental watersheds of several hundred acres.

Systems structural or productivity changes will be the key variables. Manipu-lation of the environment may be achieved in several ways, including compari-sons before and after the startup of an industrial facility.

In aquatic environments, we need to know at what point pollutant burden damages either organic productivity or ecosystems structure sufficiently to render such bodies of water unsuitable either for visual esthetic or recre-ational purposes. Despite a good many years'esearch since NEPA, we often do not know the ultimate receiving capacity of lakes or other bodies of water for energy residuals as magnitude of operation is scaled up. The answers to these questions cannot be predicted from water quality measurements alone.

~

Three types of approaches are required to answer these questions: 1) labora-tory studies to establish the case for synergistic action of several pollu-tants on reference organisms, 2) systems data from designed. intermediate-

.scale aquatic ecosystems subjected to effluent perturbation, and 3) studies based on modeling to predict intermediate scale system effects when scaled up to the size of natural bodies of water (which it would be infeasible to directly pollute). In addition, food chain data may be required, but the latter are for biomed'ical concerns not primarily environmental impact concerns.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to express my views on Federal research reserves.

16

REFERENCES U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration. 1977. National Environmental Research Park, Hanford. (Brochure) Richland Operations Office, Rich an , WA.

Vaughan, B. E. 1977. Pacific Northwest Laborator Annual Report to ERDA, Division Biomedica and Environmenta Research, Part , Eco ogical Sciences. BNWL-2100, Batte e, Richland, WA 99352 (In Press)

Foster, R. F. April 15, 1952. Biological problems associated with the discharge of pile effluent into the Columbia River. In: Biolo Research-Annual Re ort for 1951, H. A. Kornberg (ed.) HW25021, NTIC; Oak Ridge, TN.

Rickard, W. H., and B. E. Vaughan. 1977. A Descri tive Summar of the Hanford Reservation as a National Environmenta Research Par , BNWLZ299, Battel e, Rich and, WA.

I Anon. 1972; Federal Research Natural Areas in Ore on and Washin ton:

A Guidebook for Scientists and Educators - Ratt esnake Hi ls Research Natura Area, upt. o Documents, U.S. GovC. Printing Office, Wasnington, D.C. 20402.

Franklin, J. F. 1977. The biosphere reserve program in the United States. Science 195:262-267.

Vaughan, B. E. et al. 1975. Review of Potential Impact on Health and Environmental (}ualit from Meta s Enterin the Environment as a Result of Coa Utilization, Batielle Energy Program Report, Battelle, Richland, WA.

Thorp, J. M. and W. T. Hinds. 1977. Microclimates of the Arid Lands Ecolo Reserve 1968-1975. BNWL-SA-6231, Battel e, Ric land, WA.

Eberhardt, L. L. and J. M. Thomas. 1975. Biostatistical aspects of impact evaluation, pp. 13-15. In: Pacific Northwest Laborator Annual Re ort to ERDA, Division of Biomedical and Environmental Research, Part 2, Ecological Sciences.- BNWL-2000, Battel e, Rich1and, WA. 99352 Miller, P. R. and J. R. McBride. 1975. Effects of air pollutants on forests. In: Responses of Plants to Air Pollution, J. B. Mudd and T. T. Kozlowski ed. Academic Press, NY

4 BIOGRAPHICAL. BACKGROUND BURTON E. VAUGHAN Manager, Ecosystems Department Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratories Richland, Washington 99352 EDU CAT ION A.A. University of California 1947 Berkel ey A.B. Physiology University of California 1949 Berkeley Ph.D. General Physiology University of California 1955 Biophysics, and Berkeley Radiation Biology EXPERIENCE Dr. Vaughan has maintained a broad interest in biology dating from under-graduate training at Berkeley. Graduate studies were split between biophysical studies at Donner Laboratory and more extensive environmental studies at White Mou'ntain High Altitude Research Stations and in the Antarctic (McMurdo Sound).

His published work has covered radiation biology, plant physiology, mammalian physiology, and ecology. He has also served on the teaching faculty of Stanford University; and more recently, as an affiliate (associate) professor of radiology at the University of Washington. Dr. Vaughan has published about 51 papers in reports and journals of national scholarly societies of which he is a member.

At an administrative level, Dr. Vaughan has been directly responsible for the mission and performance of ecological research at Battelle's Pacific Northwest Laboratories, where he is Manager of the Ecosystems Department. Under his direction, a broad spectrum of ecological and environmental research has been developed through support derived from a number of Federal agencies and indus-trial groups (ERDA, NIH/NIEHS, U.S.A. Army Corps of Engineers, Bonneville Power Administration, NOAA/BLM, Electric Power Research Institute, American Petroleum Institute, EPA and others). These include programs on the envi-ronmental behavior of transuranic elements, the dynamics of arid landscapes, land rehabilitation, the ecology of heavy metals, marine and freshwater pol-lution effects, theoretical biology, sampling theory, and food-chain pathways.

Outside professional activities, Dr. Vaughan has been very active in public school affairs, serving on several Boards of. Education in the California school system. He is currently active in museum exhibit and public education activities as a trustee of the Pacific Science Center Foundation in Seattle and Chairman of its Science Council. Dr. Vaughan has had an abiding interest in music, being especially active over the past six years .in a chamber music sponsoring society.,;

18

,f 0'