Re: Institutional Controls Manual

[Vernon Brechin <vbrechin@igc.org>]

I consider Lenny Siegel's comments (cpro.military, Topic 1183,
Institutional Controls Manual, 29 Jan. 1998), on the recently
released EPA "Draft Reference Manual on Institutional Controls in
Hazardous Waste Cleanup," to be worth serious consideration. I
have some comments in regards to his second proposal to establish
a single universal REGISTRY for properties that are encumbered
with institutional controls.

A starting point for this concept can be found in the U.S.
Department of Interior, National Park Service (NPS), Interagency
Resources Division's, National Register of Historic Places.
Presently, information on this registry can be found on the web at
http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/welcome.htm.
The NPS Cultural Resource Division's National Register Information
System (NRIS) presently list over 80,000 properties. An important
aspect of this registry is that it caries with it an incentive to
preserve the properties and their historic records. Below is some
of the text from the web site introductory page.

 The National Register of Historic Places

 Welcome to the National Register

 The National Register of Historic Places is the Nation's
 official list of cultural resources worthy of preservation.
 Authorized under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966,
 the National Register is part of a national program to
 coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify,
 evaluate, and protect our historic and archeological resources.
 Properties listed on the Register include districts, sites,
 buildings, structures, and objects that are significant in
 American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and
 culture. The National Register is administered by the National
 Park Service, which is part of the U.S. Department of the
 Interior.

 Included among the more than 68,000 listings that make up the
 National Register are:

 * all historic areas in the National Park System;
 * over 2,200 National Historic Landmarks, which have been
 designated by the Secretary of the Interior because of their
 importance to all Americans;
 * properties across the country that have been nominated by
 governments, organizations, and individuals because they are
 significant to the nation, to a state, or to a community.

 National Register properties are distinguished by having been
 documented and evaluated according to uniform standards. These
 criteria recognize the accomplishments of all peoples who have
 contributed to the history and heritage of the United States and
 are designed to help state and local governments, Federal
 agencies, and others identify important historic and
 archeological properties worthy of preservation and of
 consideration in planning and development decisions.

 Listing in the National Register contributes to preserving
 historic properties in a number of ways:

 * Recognition that a property is of significance to the
 Nation, the State, or the community.
 * Consideration in the planning for Federal or federally
 assisted projects.
 * Eligibility for Federal tax benefits.
 * Qualification for Federal assistance for historic
 preservation, when funds are available.

One of the Register categories is "Cemeteries and Burial Places."
Even a massive crater, created as the result of a nuclear
explosive excavation experiment is now listed on the Register.

I looked into the possibility that this register might be utilized
for the recording of permanently contaminated withdrawn Public
Lands which remain under the control of the federal agencies that
were responsible for the contamination. Unless changes are made
in the present nomination process, this particular National
Register is probably not a useful vehicle for recording these
controlled properties which require permanent institutional
controls.

There are several reasons for this. First, this particular
register generally records historic properties which are over
50 years old. Second, dump sites and contaminated sites are
generally not considered worth remembering, in the traditional
historic sense. Finally, the existing nomination process puts
almost all the responsibility, for filing the nomination and the
registration, on the federal agency that controls the property
that the historic place resides on. This nomination process
generally requires historic research and the filling of a lengthy
form which requires the resources of agency staff specialist such
as historians, archaeologist, and environmental specialist. The
agency that contaminated the property is generally not inclined to
expose the entire history of permanently contaminated sites.
Potential liability and national security information
classification issues may also serve to limit the full disclosure
of the extent of the contamination. As a result, the agency is
unlikely to devote its limited resources to a registration process
that might draw increased attention to properties, presently under
its control, which require permanent institutional controls. On
the other hand, the agency may view the use of institutional
controls as a means of insuring its control over borrowed Public
Lands, well into the future.

The following procedure describes the typical process a federal
agency goes through to nominate an historic place that lies within
the properties it controls.
1. The agency field office request the nomination/registration
 forms from the local state historic preservation office.
2. With the help of the state it completes most of the form.
3. The form is sent to the state historic preservation office
 for their approval and then returned to the filing agency
 field office.
4. The filing agency field office then sends the form to
 headquarters for their approval. From there it is forwarded
 to the National Park Service Keeper of the Register who makes
 the final determination as to whether the site qualifies for
 listing on the National Registry of Historic Places.

This registry is the result of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended (NHPA). A registry for properties
requiring institutional controls should be administered by a
federal institution that has no vested interest in the control.
Such an institution should only be interested in obtaining
comprehensive records, in devising various ways of recording them
and in allowing public access to the background data which
resulted in the imposition of institutional controls on the listed
properties. Standards should be devised for describing the
location in three dimensional space. I suggest the location be
given in standard geographic coordinates which should be accurate
to within at least plus or minus 10 meters. The depth and
volumetric extent of subsurface contamination should also be
accurately described, along with a detailed description of the
components of the contamination. The period of time, that the
potential hazard is likely to exist, should be stated in clear
quantitative terms. The frequent use of the vague term
"long-term" has no place in such a registry.

The Founders of this country put much emphasis on the need to
limit the scope of the federal government. The imposition of
federal controls upon contaminated properties was certainly not
part of their plan. Such controls should only be viewed as a last
resort.

I hope this introduction to a registry that already exist will
stimulate some serious consideration of the creation of a registry
which will serve the needs a the public which is becoming
increasingly dependent upon the imposition of institutional
controls. Such a dependent public needs to be reminded that such
institutional controls can not be relied upon to last forever. 

Vernon Brechin
vbrechin@igc.org

--
Aimee Houghton
Program Coordinator
The Center for Public Environmental Oversight (formerly CAREER/PRO)
425 Market Street, 2nd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
tel: (415) 904-7750; fax: (415) 904-7765
Email: aimeeh@cpeo.org

A Program of the San Francisco Urban Institute