Conflict resolution nonprofit studies group monitoring clean-up of Fort Detrick's Area B

Oct. 14—A nonprofit hired to help improve how an Army advisory board is run has found that members would like information to be made more accessible and for more patience, respect and appreciation from everybody involved.

The Consensus Building Institute, a Massachusetts-based organization, spent two months interviewing people involved in the clean-up of Fort Detrick's Area B.

Stacie Smith, managing director at the institute, summarized the nonprofit's progress at a meeting on Wednesday of the advisory board that monitors clean-up efforts.

In the mid-20th century, the Army used Area B — a 399-acre plot of land between Kemp Lane and Shookstown Road — as a test site for its biological warfare program.

Because of how scientists disposed of hazardous waste on Area B during this time period, the land's groundwater is contaminated. The Army has spent decades studying the extent of the contamination and trying to figure out how to address it.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has overseen these efforts since 2009, when the federal agency placed the site's groundwater on its National Priorities List.

This action grouped the groundwater with other Superfund sites around the country that are contaminated from having hazardous waste dumped, left in the open or otherwise improperly managed.

The Army keeps civilians apprised of clean-up activities on Area B through the Restoration Advisory Board, a committee that holds public meetings regularly.

To help improve how the board meetings are run and better engage with community members, EPA employees Jenna O'Brien and Angela Ithier applied for the Area B Superfund site to work with the EPA's Conflict Prevention and Resolution Center.

The site was accepted into the program in March, O'Brien, the EPA remedial project manager for the Area B site, wrote in an email.

Over the summer, representatives of the Consensus Building Institute arrived in Frederick to begin assessing common concerns about clean-up efforts at the site and how information is shared with the community.

Throughout August and September, the nonprofit interviewed 22 people, including federal, state and local government employees; members of the advisory board; and other Frederick community members.

Though many expressed confidence in technical aspects of the clean-up effort, Smith said, some shared concern about uncertainty surrounding the extent, content and location of the contamination.

Some also expressed worry about the potential of "vapor intrusion" in current and planned homes around Area B. This is the process by which chemical vapors move from contaminated groundwater through the soil into the basements or foundations of buildings.

Though vapor intrusion can cause health risks when chemical vapors are inhaled by the occupants of buildings, effects can be mitigated through a variety of methods.

People interviewed by the nonprofit listed the accessibility of historical materials and information; timely sharing of advisory board materials and summaries; and consistency of advisory board meeting schedules and protocols as areas of improvement.

Some said that while discussions were usually respectful at advisory board meetings, there should be more patience, respect and appreciation between everyone involved.

Others said community members should have the chance to influence decisions about the clean-up effort.

People who were interviewed also suggested ways the advisory board could better share information with the community about the effort.

Jen Peppe Hahn, a community advocate and longtime member of the advisory board, thanked the nonprofit for the work it has completed.

"For those that didn't have the chance to speak with them, they did an incredible job of being really laid back and encouraging and [not] pointing fingers at anyone and really pulling thoughts together," she said at the meeting on Wednesday. "And they did it very professionally."

Next, Smith said, the institute will share a summary of its findings with those who were interviewed to give them the chance to suggest revisions or additions.

It plans to present a final report from the interviews and share recommendations for improving community engagement and processes within the advisory board at the next meeting, which is scheduled for January.

The Consensus Building Institute is still open to conducting additional interviews with community members and those involved in the clean-up effort. Those interested may email afullem@cbi.org.

Follow Angela Roberts on Twitter: @24_angier