In the absence of MJ Byrne, Deputy Designated Federal Official, Joe Vozella, Assistant
Area Manager of Environmental Management DOE/LAAO called the meeting to order at 6:10 p.m.
He turned the meeting over to Elmer Torres, Vice Chair who was chairing in the absence of
Menice S. Manzanares, Chair. Mr. Torres asked Ann DuBois to establish the quorum. Ms.
DuBois responded that a quorum was present.
James Alarid moved, seconded by George Chandler to approve the meeting agenda.
George Chandler moved, seconded by Angelina Valdez to approve by consensus the
February Board minutes as amended.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Paul Schumann, ER/LANL distributed a written report on the Public Participation
Requirements for Class 1, 2 and 3 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Permit
Modifications. The opportunity for public comments is coming soon. No date has been set
yet. He said that eight sites have been proposed for "No Further Action". Paul
Schumann promised to give to the Environmental Restoration Committee a list of the sites.
Elmer Torres asked if this process is new? Mr. Schumann said that two prior formal
modifications to the permit were made when 102 sites were taken off the permit in 1997 and
1998. More sites will be proposed when the sites are cleaned up. Mr. Torres asked if
public meetings were held in tribal communities? Mr. Schumann responded that the
regulations require public meetings in those communities nearest to the facility e.g., the
Los Alamos town site. LANL could decide to meet in tribal locations. James Bearzi, NMED,
reported that the regulation says that the meeting must be in the closest effected
community. Other meetings are optional.
Evelyn Maruska inquired if the publications announcing the meeting can reach a broader
audience than Los Alamos e.g., the Monitor. Mr. Schumann said that the practice is
to announce public meetings in The New Mexican, Journal North, the Rio
Grande Sun, and the Monitor. The public announcement process including post
cards is broader than what is required.
REPORTS
A. Briefing on the Los Alamos National Laboratory Environmental Restoration
Project by Ted Taylor, DOE, Los Alamos Area Office
Mr. Taylor said that his presentation would provide background for John Themelis=s report. Mr. Taylor distributed a copy of his
presentation. He described the Baseline activities for the Environmental Restoration
Project. Mr. Taylor promised to give the Board a copy of the site closure list.
Presentation on the Albuquerque Environmental Programs Budget Overview by John
Themelis, Deputy Assistant Manager for Environmental Management Programs.
Mr. Themelis distributed a copy of his presentation on the scope of the Environmental
Management program, and its budget. In 1998, Albuquerque Operations decided to shift the
clean up costs to the new waste generator.
George Chandler asked about the chart showing how LANL becomes a bigger part of budget
pie after the smaller sites are cleaned up. He expressed his concern about the budget
assumption built into this chart. As the smaller sites are cleaned up, the congressional
delegations representing these areas are more likely to drop their support rather than
vote for an expansion in the budget.
Tammie Gomez asked about the chart describing the workscope managed by Albuquerque
Operations. She asked which tribes are receiving the Tribal Environmental Grants and how
other tribes could apply for funds. Mr. Themelis responded that the tribes are Cochiti,
San Ildefonso, Santa Clara and Jemez. He said that other tribes may apply for additional
funds.
Evelyn Maruska suggested that the cleanup budget shift should happen sooner than when
the smaller sites are cleaned up because the need at LANL is greater.
Elmer Torres thanked John Themelis for his presentation. Mr. Torres expressed his
concern about the possibility of a budget drop in the future. He suggested that
operational facilities should be evaluated differently. Mr. Themelis said that the
Department is committed to this plan and will work to ensure that adequate funding is
available for complete cleanup. Mr. Torres requested that Mr. Themelis make another
presentation to the Board at a fall meeting.
Chair Report
Mr. Torres described the Common Values paper drafted from input at the
Site-Specific Advisory Boards Chairs meeting in Idaho. Ms. Manzanares was invited to
participate in a conference call on April 27 to further refine this paper. Mr. Torres
expressed his view that the Board was most interested in issues such as cultural
sensitivity awareness, transportation issues and budget. After the drafting process is
completed, all Boards are expected to sign this document.
Elmer Torres, Acting Chair, introduced the topic by saying that the contract with Ray
Armenta needed to be reviewed at the next Board meeting in May. Mr. Torres asked that the
Board read the contract that was distributed and give their comments and suggestions to
Menice Manzanares. John Alejandro asked about how the contract was extended for one month.
John Alejandro questioned the legality of the extension. He wanted to know what was the
liability in extending the contract or in not acting.
Joe Vozella responded that MJ Byrne coordinated the extension so the Board could have
staff support while talking about the issue. He stated that there was consultation with
DOE procurement and legal counsel before the extension was granted. Mr. Alejandro
requested that the procurement and legal documentation on the extension be sent to the
Board as soon as possible. Mr. Torres said that the charge for the contract is
confidential and the job description is to be used for the Board to review what is needed
for the Board at this time. The options are to continue the contract with Mr. Armenta or
not renew the contract and re-bid the contract. Mr. Torres said that the Board needed
clarification on the bidding process.
James Alarid said that there is support for Mr. Armenta continuing his contract. He
said that it was important to continue the cultural mosaic that we have in the staff. Mr.
Alarid moved, seconded by Mr. Alejandro that the Board retain Mr. Armenta and extend
his contract. Fran Berting asked that the Board follow the process identified by Mr.
Torres. George Chandler said that this process was very irregular. He thought that the
Board needed a non-public meeting to discuss this matter. He stated that he did not like
this process. Evelyn Maruska asked if this contract had defaulted and if continuity is
needed? Mr. Torres said that the Board had not reviewed contracts before. The Board now
needs a formal process for evaluation. He said that the Board needed MJ Byrne and Menice
Manzanares to answer questions.
Ms. Maruska said that the Board needed an evaluation of Mr. Armenta’s performance
and have some comparative data to make a decision. Dr. Berting reminded the Board that we
were to have an Executive Session in March to have a closed discussion about this topic.
She felt that a public discussion is not appropriate. She said the Board needs time to
review the contract and make comments to Menice Manzanares. Agustin Garcia said that the
Board needs documentation on what is the controversy. Mr. Vozella said that the Board
needs the contracting issues laid out in terms of sole source vs. competitiveness. A fact
sheet on procurement could be developed. Patrick Feehan said that the Board mailing packet
contained no information on this issue. Mr. Chandler suggested that Mr. Alarid’s
motion did not have any time frame in it. Mr. Chandler made an amendment to the motion
that Mr. Armenta’s contract be extended for one year. He said that this decision
should have been made in Executive Session. Evaluation of the existing contract is
important. The Board should plan for the next time around. The Board should review all
staff. A better process should be created. Mr. Alarid and Mr. Alejandro agreed to the
amendment to the motion. Mr. Alejandro asked if sole source could be used for professional
services? Does the Board have to prepare a revised scope of work and go through
procurement? The criteria for evaluating performance must be spelled out. The question
been reviewed in public concerns the contract and that the person is not being discussed.
The Open Meeting Act requires that the Board take action in public.
Mr. Armijo said that the sensitive work on this contract should be done at the
Committee level. The issue is distribution of the workload. He expressed his appreciation
of the staff assistance and the importance of focusing on the Board’s mission. Tammie
Gomez suggested that Mr. Armenta be asked to share what Ms. Byrne and Ms. Manzanares had
told him about his contract. Mr. Armenta said that he had been told that his contract
ended on May 5. Yesterday, (May 23) he was told that the contract had been extended to
June 5. On February 24, the day after the February 23 Board meeting, he was told that Ms.
Byrne did not want to renew his contract. The position title would be changed to provide
more assistance to Ann DuBois. The position might be cut and someone else would come in to
do some of his job responsibilities. Mr. Armenta explained that he met with David Gurulé.
Mr. Gurulé said that it is the Board’s call to decide if the staff position stays or
goes.
Dr. Berting stated if more secretarial assistance is needed, there is a budget problem.
It was a matter of the workload distribution. Mr. Torres wondered if there were additional
budget for staff. A motion was considered to set up an ad hoc committee to review the
contract process. Mr. Chandler said that there was a motion on the floor. There was a call
for the question. Janet Gerwin said that the workload distribution was not at issue here.
Mr. Alarid’s motion passed 9-3. Mr. Torres said that the motion carried to
extend Mr. Armenta’s contract for one year. He requested that a letter be sent from
the Board to indicate this vote.
Mr. Chandler moved, seconded by Dr. Berting, to establish a committee to examine
the contract process. The motion passed 12-0. Mr. Alarid moved, seconded by John
Alejandro, to recommend to MJ Byrne that the budget be examined to see if there are
sufficient funds to pay for ˝ time clerical support but not at the cost of Mr.
Armenta’s contract. These would be additional funds. Mr. Armijo suggested that the
committee research the need rather than asking if the Board needs facilitation. This
research task should be the responsibility of the ad hoc committee. The motion passed
12-0. Mr. Torres asked that an official letter be sent to convey the Board’s
decision.
IV. BOARD COMMENTS
V. Adjournment