This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-04-278T 
entitled 'Nuclear Waste Cleanup: Preliminary Observations on DOE's 
Cleanup of the Paducah Uranium Enrichment Plant' which was released on 
December 06, 2003.

This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office 
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a 
longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately.

Testimony:

Before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate:

United States General Accounting Office:

GAO:

For Release on Delivery Expected at 9:00 a.m. CST:

Saturday, December 6, 2003:

Nuclear Waste Cleanup:

Preliminary Observations on DOE's Cleanup of the Paducah Uranium 
Enrichment Plant:

Statement of Robin M. Nazzaro, Director Natural Resources and 
Environment:

GAO-04-278T:

GAO Highlights:

Highlights of GAO-04-278T, testimony before the Committee on Energy 
and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate 

Why GAO Did This Study:

In 1988, radioactive contamination was found in the drinking water 
wells of residences located near the federal governments uranium 
enrichment plant in Paducah, Kentucky, which is still in operation. In 
response, the Department of Energy (DOE) began a cleanup program to 
identify and remove contamination in the groundwater, surface water, 
and soil located within and outside the plant. In 2000, GAO reported 
that DOE faced significant challenges in cleaning up the site and that 
it was doubtful that the cleanup would be completed as scheduled by 
2010, and within the $1.3 billion cost projection. 

GAO was asked to testify on (1) how much DOE has spent on the Paducah 
cleanup and for what purposes, and the estimated total future costs 
for the site; (2) the status of DOEs cleanup effort; and (3) the 
challenges DOE faces in completing the cleanup. 

This testimony is based on ongoing work, and GAO expects to issue a 
final report on this work in April 2004.

What GAO Found:

Since 1988, DOE has spent $823 million, adjusted to fiscal year 2002 
constant dollars, on the Paducah cleanup program. Of this total, DOE 
spent $372 million (45 percent) for a host of operations activities, 
including general maintenance and security; $298 million (36 percent) 
for actions to clean up contamination and waste; and almost $153 
million (19 percent) for studies to assess the extent of contamination 
and determine what cleanup actions were needed. DOE currently projects 
that the cleanup will take until 2019 and cost $2 billion to complete
nine years and $700 million more than its earlier projection. The $2 
billion, however, does not include the cost of other DOE activities 
required to close the site after the uranium enrichment plant ceases 
operations, including final decontamination and decommissioning of the 
plant and long-term environmental monitoring. DOE estimates these 
activities will bring the total cost to over $13 billion through 2070. 

DOE has made some progress in cleaning up contamination and waste at 
Paducah, but the majority of the work remains to be done. For example, 
while DOE has removed over 4,500 tons of scrap metal, over 50,000 tons 
of contaminated scrap metal remain. Similarly, while DOEs pilot test 
of a new technology for removing the hazardous chemical 
trichloroethylene (TCE) from groundwater at the site had promising 
results, the technology will not be fully implemented for over a year. 

DOEs key challenge in completing the Paducah cleanup is achieving 
stakeholder agreement on the cleanup approach. For example, 
differences between DOE and the regulatory entitiesthe Commonwealth 
of Kentucky and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencyover the 
cleanup scope and time frames resulted in an almost 2-year dispute, 
from June 2001 to April 2003, that disrupted progress. All three 
parties are working to develop an accelerated cleanup plan, but 
continued cooperation will be required in order to advance the 
cleanup. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-278T.

To view the full product, click on the link above.
For more information, contact Robin Nazzaro at (202) 512-3841 or 
NazzaroR@gao.gov.

[End of section]

Senator Bunning:

We are pleased to be here today to discuss the Department of Energy's 
(DOE) efforts to clean up contamination and waste at its Paducah, 
Kentucky, uranium enrichment plant. The plant, which continues to 
operate under a lease to a private company, the United States 
Enrichment Corporation (USEC), enriches uranium for commercial nuclear 
power plants. DOE began a cleanup program at the site in 1988, after 
contaminated groundwater was found in nearby residents' drinking water 
wells, and contaminated surface water and soils were identified within 
and outside the site. In August 1999, in response to allegations that 
past plant activities had endangered employees' health, DOE's Office of 
Oversight conducted an independent investigation that identified 
improper disposal of hazardous and radioactive materials on-and off-
site and the release of contaminated water into streams and drainage 
ditches.[Footnote 1] In 2000, prompted by continuing congressional 
concerns, we reported that DOE faced significant challenges, such as 
obtaining stakeholder concurrence with its approach in cleaning up the 
Paducah site and that it was doubtful that the cleanup would be 
completed as scheduled by 2010 and within the $1.3 billion cost 
projection.[Footnote 2] Our statement today describes the preliminary 
results of our ongoing work, directed by the conference report for 
DOE's 2003 appropriations, on DOE's cleanup efforts at the Paducah 
plant.[Footnote 3] Specifically, we will discuss (1) how much DOE has 
spent on the cleanup program and for what purposes, and the estimated 
total future costs for the site; (2) the status of DOE efforts to clean 
up the contamination at the site; and (3) the challenges DOE faces in 
completing the cleanup.

In summary:

* Since 1988, DOE has spent $823 million, adjusted to fiscal year 2002 
constant dollars, on the Paducah site. Of this total, DOE spent about 
$372 million (45 percent) to pay for operations at the site, including 
construction, security, general maintenance, and litigation; $298 
million (36 percent) on actions to clean up contamination and remove 
waste; and almost $153 million (19 percent) for studies to assess the 
extent of the contamination and determine what cleanup actions were 
necessary. Although DOE estimated in January 2000 that the cleanup 
would be complete by 2010 and cost $1.3 billion, DOE now estimates that 
completing the cleanup will take at least until 2019 and cost almost $2 
billion. The $2 billion, however, does not include the cost of other 
DOE activities required to close the site, including final 
decontamination and decommissioning of the buildings, equipment, and 
materials used in the uranium enrichment process after operations cease 
at the plant, as well as long-term environmental monitoring at the 
site. Completing these activities will bring the total cost of closing 
the uranium enrichment plant to over $13 billion through 2070.

* DOE has made some progress in cleaning up contamination and waste at 
Paducah since 1988, but much of the work remains to be done. For 
example, DOE has removed over 4,500 tons of scrap metal, but over 
50,000 tons remain. Similarly, although DOE has tested a new technology 
for removing the hazardous chemical trichloroethylene (TCE) from 
groundwater at the site with promising results, the test removed only 
about 1 percent of the estimated amount of TCE, and the technology will 
not be fully implemented for over a year. DOE also plans to conduct a 
number of studies to determine if other cleanup actions, in addition to 
those already planned, are necessary. For example, DOE will test the 
groundwater near several areas where waste is buried to determine if 
contamination is leaking and, if so, what corrective action will be 
needed.

* DOE's key challenge in completing the cleanup at Paducah is achieving 
stakeholder agreement on the cleanup approach, including scope and time 
frames. For almost 2 years, from June 2001 to April 2003, DOE and the 
regulators--the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the 
Commonwealth of Kentucky--were unable to agree on cleanup scope and 
time frames, disrupting cleanup progress. DOE, EPA, and Kentucky are 
currently negotiating approval of an accelerated cleanup plan; however, 
the success of the plan will depend on the parties' ability to agree on 
the scope and time frames for individual projects as the cleanup moves 
forward. In addition, DOE's proposed plan is only the latest of several 
attempts to resolve problems at the site since 1999. Given the parties' 
past difficulties in resolving disputes over cleanup scope and time 
frames, and the number of decisions that remain to be made, it is 
unclear whether DOE will be successful in accelerating the cleanup.

Background:

The Paducah uranium enrichment plant is located on about 3,500 acres in 
western Kentucky, about 3 miles south of the Ohio River and about 10 
miles west of the city of Paducah. The plant--formerly operated by DOE 
and now operated by USEC--enriches uranium for commercial nuclear power 
reactors. Plant operations have contaminated the site over time with 
radioactive and hazardous chemical wastes, including technetium-99 (a 
radioactive fission product); polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs); 
uranium; and volatile organic compounds such as TCE, which was used as 
a degreaser.

Responsibility for management of the Paducah site is divided between 
two DOE offices. The Office of Environmental Management has overall 
responsibility for the site cleanup being performed by its contractor, 
Bechtel Jacobs. The Office of Nuclear Energy acts as the site's 
landlord, with responsibilities for maintaining roads, grounds, and 
facilities not leased to USEC.

EPA and Kentucky cooperate in regulating the cleanup under the federal 
facility agreement, which integrates the requirements of two federal 
environmental statutes governing the cleanup of the Paducah site--the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 
of 1980, as amended, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 
1976, as amended. Respectively, these statutes provide broad federal 
authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of 
hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment 
and to regulate the safe management and disposal of hazardous or other 
solid wastes.

In addition to the federal facility agreement, DOE uses two other 
documents to manage the cleanup. The site management plan, which is a 
cleanup strategy document developed annually by DOE and subject to 
approval by EPA and Kentucky, includes timetables, deadlines, and 
projected activities for the cleanup. DOE uses the lifecycle baseline 
to manage the cleanup; it contains detailed information on cleanup 
projects, cost estimates, and time frames for completion and is updated 
frequently by DOE's contractor to reflect the evolving nature of the 
cleanup process.

DOE's cleanup plan for the Paducah site divides the cleanup into seven 
major categories:

* Groundwater--About 10 billion gallons of groundwater are contaminated 
with radioactive and hazardous materials.

* Surface water--Contaminated surface water has been discovered in 
creeks and ditches leaving the site. One of the main sources of this 
contamination is rain runoff from the thousands of tons of contaminated 
scrap metal stored at the site.

* Surface soils--Both on-and off-site soils and sediments have been 
contaminated by water runoff, spills, and buried waste.

* Legacy waste--Low-level radioactive or hazardous waste generated 
before 2001 remains stored in various locations at the site.

* DOE material storage areas--160 indoor and outdoor storage areas 
contain a variety of radioactive, hazardous, and other materials. These 
areas have been added to the cleanup scope since our 2000 report.

* Burial grounds--12 burial grounds contain a variety of waste, 
including barrels of materials with low levels of radioactivity and 
hazardous chemicals.

* Decontamination and decommissioning of 17 unused buildings and 
structures--These facilities were contaminated during earlier 
operations; 15 have been added to the cleanup scope since our 2000 
report.

DOE Has Spent $823 Million on the Paducah Cleanup Program, and Billions 
More Will be Required for Final Site Closure:

From 1988 through 2003, DOE spent $823 million, adjusted to fiscal year 
2002 constant dollars, at the Paducah site. As figure 1 shows, $372 
million (45 percent) was spent on operations at the site such as 
providing security, performing general maintenance, providing 
municipal water for nearby residents, maintaining almost 38,000 
cylinders of depleted uranium hexafluoride,[Footnote 4] constructing 
storage and other facilities, and carrying out activities related to 
litigation; $298 million (36 percent) was spent on cleanup actions, 
including waste removal and treatment; and $153 million (19 percent) 
was spent on studies to assess the contamination and determine what 
cleanup actions were necessary. These percentages are similar to those 
DOE's Office of Environmental Management found for all of its cleanup 
programs: only about one-third of the environmental management program 
budget goes toward actual cleanup and risk reduction work, with the 
remainder going to maintenance, fixed costs, and miscellaneous 
activities, contributing to a lack of risk reduction and raising costs 
for DOE's cleanups.[Footnote 5]

Figure 1: Expenditures at Paducah by Category, Fiscal Years 1988-2003:

[See PDF for image]

Note: Total cleanup expenditures for fiscal years 1988-2003, adjusted 
to fiscal year 2002 dollars, were $823 million. The individual dollar 
figures noted above may not total $823 million because of rounding.

[End of figure]

DOE's current estimate for completing the cleanup is almost $2 billion-
-a $700 million increase over its 2000 estimate--and the completion 
date has moved from 2010 to 2019. The cost increase is attributable to 
an expanded project scope as well as millions of dollars for site 
operations for each of the 9 additional years of cleanup. However, the 
cleanup estimate does not represent DOE's total responsibilities at the 
site: In addition to the cleanup program, DOE will build and operate a 
facility to convert the depleted uranium hexafluoride stored at the 
site to a more stable form and carry out final decontamination and 
decommissioning (D&D) of the uranium enrichment process buildings, 
equipment, and materials once USEC ceases plant operations. 
Furthermore, after the cleanup, D&D, and uranium hexafluoride 
conversion, DOE will continue to incur long-term stewardship costs at 
the site for such activities as monitoring groundwater and surface 
water for residual contamination. Completing these activities will 
bring the total cost of closing the uranium enrichment plant to over 
$13 billion through 2070.

While DOE Has Made Some Progress, the Bulk of the Cleanup Remains:

Since 1988, DOE has made some progress in cleaning up the contamination 
and waste at Paducah, but much of the cleanup work remains to be done. 
Some of DOE's accomplishments since our 2000 report as well as tasks 
remaining follow:

* Groundwater--DOE has treated about 710 million gallons of groundwater 
to remove TCE and technetium-99 and prevent off-site contamination. 
DOE's pilot test of technology for removing TCE sources--large 
concentrations of accumulated TCE--had promising results. However, the 
test removed only about 1 percent of the estimated 180,000 gallons of 
TCE that had leaked into the ground, and the system will not be fully 
implemented until at least 2005, according to DOE contractor 
officials.[Footnote 6] The estimated completion date for removing TCE 
from the two major sources at the site is 2010.

* Surface water--To prevent contaminated runoff, DOE has removed about 
4,500 tons of scrap metal from the site--primarily crushed drums that 
previously had contained uranium and aluminum ingots. An estimated 
50,500 tons of scrap metal remains to be removed from the site. At the 
north-south diversion ditch, a key wastewater conduit from the plant, 
surface water discharges and runoff have been rerouted and piped to 
bypass contaminated areas, and DOE has begun excavation work to remove 
contaminated soil from the first of five sections of the ditch. DOE 
plans to complete excavation of sections one and two by 2005. The 
estimated completion date for all surface water cleanup activities is 
2017.

* Surface soils--DOE has assessed all surface soils at the site to 
identify radioactive contamination and protect plant workers. In 
addition, DOE has removed 2,500 cubic yards of contaminated soils--
enough to cover a football field 17 inches deep. However, because soil 
contamination represents a lower risk for exposure and migration than, 
for example, groundwater, and because other work, such as removal of 
scrap metal, must be performed before some soils can be reached, this 
category is a lower priority. DOE estimates that a total of 90,000 
cubic yards of soils will be removed and disposed by 2015.

* Legacy waste--DOE has performed initial characterization of all of 
this waste--the equivalent of 52,000 55-gallon barrels--for on-site 
storage, and disposed of over 7,000 barrels off-site. Another 6,000 
have been repackaged and are ready for disposal. The remaining legacy 
waste--over 38,000 barrels--will be characterized and disposed of by 
2010.

* DOE material storage areas (DMSA)--DOE has ranked the 160 DMSAs at 
the Paducah site on the basis of their potential to contain hazardous 
materials or contaminate the environment: 33 are high priority, 11 are 
medium priority, and 116 are low priority. DOE has characterized and 
removed materials from 9 high-and 15 low-priority DMSAs and has 
completed characterization of an additional 17 high-priority DMSAs. DOE 
still needs to remove materials from these 17 and characterize and 
remove materials in the remaining 119 DMSAs. According to DOE 
officials, only 0.01 percent of the materials characterized to date 
have been determined to be hazardous waste. DOE plans to complete 
characterization by the end of fiscal year 2009 and dispose of all 
materials from the DMSAs by 2013.

* Burial grounds--To date, DOE's activities at the 12 burial grounds 
have consisted of studies and environmental monitoring and maintenance. 
Currently, DOE plans to cap--cover with a layer of soil--the burial 
grounds and monitor groundwater to evaluate the effectiveness of the 
caps. If the burial grounds are found to be leaking TCE or other 
hazardous substances, some burial grounds may need to be excavated. 
Groundwater monitoring will be ongoing through 2019.

* Decontamination and decommissioning of 17 buildings and structures 
that are no longer used for the uranium enrichment process--DOE has 
completed its assessment of the contamination and has begun removing 
the infrastructure of one of the buildings. The remaining 16 are 
scheduled to be completed by 2017.

After operations cease at the plant, DOE will decontaminate and 
decommission the uranium enrichment process buildings and equipment. 
[Footnote 7] During D&D, DOE will also address, as necessary, those 
areas where additional studies are being done.

Reaching Agreement on Cleanup Scope and Time Frames Remains the Key 
Challenge to Cleanup Progress:

DOE's most difficult challenge has been, and could likely remain, 
obtaining stakeholder agreement on the cleanup approach, including 
scope and time frames. According to DOE officials, reaching agreement 
has been more difficult at Paducah than at other DOE cleanup sites. For 
example, from June 2001 to April 2003, DOE, EPA, and Kentucky were in 
dispute over the 2001 site management plan because they could not agree 
on the cleanup scope and time frames. Specifically, in response to 
congressional concern about the lack of cleanup progress prior to 
hearings held in 1999, DOE, Kentucky, and EPA drafted a site management 
plan to expedite cleanup actions at the site. According to Kentucky 
officials, technical staff of all three parties agreed to this plan. 
However, DOE headquarters officials later abandoned the plan, citing 
budgetary constraints and their belief that the risk did not warrant 
all the planned cleanup actions.

DOE and Kentucky have also had difficulty agreeing on the details of 
specific cleanup projects. For example, it took the two parties 5 
months to reach agreement on the amount and type of data required to 
confirm that soil from the north-south diversion ditch could be 
appropriately disposed of in an onsite landfill. DOE and Kentucky also 
had difficulties resolving DOE's regulatory violations at the site, 
which, according to DOE officials, slowed cleanup progress.

DOE and the regulators have recently resolved a number of differences 
that were delaying cleanup actions. For example, in October 2003 DOE 
and Kentucky agreed to a settlement that resolved outstanding 
regulatory violations related to, among other things, DOE's management 
of hazardous waste at the site. In addition, all three parties are 
currently negotiating approval of the 2004 site management plan, which 
will provide a framework for accelerating the cleanup. While we are 
encouraged by these recent events, the success of the plan, once 
approved, will depend on the parties' ability to reach agreement on the 
scope and time frames for individual projects as the cleanup moves 
forward. Furthermore, agreement on an accelerated cleanup plan may not 
preclude future disputes between DOE and the regulators. For example, 
DOE and the state of Washington have had an accelerated plan in place 
since March 2002, but they only recently completed a lengthy 
negotiation over time frames for disposal of mixed radioactive and 
toxic wastes at the Hanford cleanup site.

In addition, as table 1 shows, the accelerated cleanup plan will be 
only the latest of several cleanup plans for the site since 1999, all 
of which have differed significantly in cost, scope, and time frame for 
cleanup and were intended as solutions to problems at the site. For 
example, DOE's Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management 
testified in July 2000 that a solid and effective working relationship 
had been established with Kentucky and EPA and a process was in place 
that would lead to mutually supported cleanup decisions.[Footnote 8] 
Ten months later, DOE was in dispute with the regulators over the site 
management plan.

Table 1: DOE Estimates of Paducah Plant Cleanup Costs and Completion 
Schedule:

Dollars in billions.

October 1999 appropriations hearing; Estimated cleanup cost: $0.7; 
Estimated completion date: 2012.

January 2000 lifecycle baseline; Estimated cleanup cost: 1.3; 
Estimated completion date: 2010.

Amended fiscal year 2003 site management plan; Estimated cleanup cost: 
2.5; Estimated completion date: 2030.

Fiscal year 2004 site management plan; Estimated cleanup cost: 2.0; 
Estimated completion date: 2019.

Sources: GAO and DOE.

[End of table]

Given DOE's past difficulties in reaching agreement with its regulators 
and the details that remain to be agreed upon, it is unclear whether 
DOE will be successful in accelerating the cleanup.

These are our observations to date. We will continue to further assess 
DOE's progress and challenges in cleaning up the Paducah site and plan 
to issue our final report in April 2004.

Thank you, Senator Bunning. This concludes my prepared statement. I 
will be pleased to respond to any questions that you may have.

Contact and Acknowledgments:

For further information on this testimony, please contact me at (202) 
512-3841. Individuals making key contributions to this testimony 
included Nancy Crothers, Chris Ferencik, Kerry Dugan Hawranek, Kurt 
Kershow, and Sherry McDonald.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Department of Energy, Office of Oversight, Office of Environment, 
Safety, and Health, Phase I: Independent Investigation of the Paducah 
Gaseous Diffusion Plant (Washington, D.C., Oct. 1999).

[2] U.S. General Accounting Office, Nuclear Waste Cleanup: DOE's 
Paducah Plan Faces Uncertainties and Excludes Costly Cleanup 
Activities, GAO/RCED-00-96 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 28, 2000).

[3] H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-10, at 895 (2003).

[4] Uranium hexafluoride, a byproduct of the uranium enrichment 
process, must be handled in leakproof containers because when it comes 
into contact with water, such as water vapor in the air, it forms 
corrosive hydrogen fluoride and a uranium-fluoride compound called 
uranyl fluoride.

[5] Department of Energy, A Review of the Environmental Management 
Program (Washington, D.C., Feb. 4, 2002).

[6] According to DOE, this estimate is based on the assumptions that 
TCE was used at the site from 1953 to 1993 and that a fixed amount was 
released to the ground each day. A high degree of uncertainty surrounds 
this estimate, and the actual amount of TCE released cannot be 
verified. 

[7] No schedule currently exists for full-scale D&D of the operating 
plant.

[8] July 12, 2000, testimony of Dr. Carolyn Huntoon before the House 
Budget Committee Task Force on Natural Resources and the Environment.