Environmental Contamination: Information on the Funding and Cleanup Status of Defense Sites
Published: 2010-03-17T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Under the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP), the Department of Defense (DOD) is responsible for cleaning up about 5,400 sites on military bases that have been closed under the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process, as well as 21,500 sites on active bases and over 4,700 formerly used defense sites (FUDS), properties that DOD owned or controlled and transferred to other parties prior to October 1986. The cleanup of contaminants, such as hazardous chemicals or unexploded ordnance, at BRAC bases has been an impediment to the timely transfer of these properties to parties who can put them to new uses. The goals of DERP include (1) reducing risk to human health and the environment (2) preparing BRAC properties to be environmentally suitable for transfer (3) having final remedies in place and completing response actions and (4) fulfilling other established milestones to demonstrate progress toward meeting program performance goals. This testimony is based on prior work and discusses information on (1) how DOD allocates cleanup funding at all sites with defense waste and (2) BRAC cleanup status. It also summarizes other key issues that GAO has identified in the past that can impact DOD's environmental cleanup efforts.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: DOD uses the same method to propose funding for cleanup at FUDS, active sites, and BRAC sites; cleanup funding is based on DERP goals and is generally proportional to the number of sites in each of these categories. Officials in the Military Departments, Defense Agencies, and FUDS program, who are responsible for executing the environmental restoration activities at their respective sites, formulate cleanup budget proposals using the instructions in DOD's financial management regulation and DERP environmental restoration performance goals. DERP's goals include target dates for reaching the remedy-in-place or response complete (RIP/RC) milestone. For example, for sites included under the first four BRAC rounds, the goal is to reach the RIP/RC milestone at sites with hazardous substances released before October 1986 by 2015 and for sites in the 2005 BRAC round by 2014. DOD's military components plan cleanup actions that are required to meet DERP goals at the installation or site level. DOD requires the components to assess their inventory of BRAC and other sites by relative risk to help make informed decisions about which sites to clean up first. Using these relative risk categories, as well as other factors, the components set more specific restoration targets each fiscal year to demonstrate progress and prepare a budget to achieve those goals and targets. DOD data show that, in applying the goals, and targets, cleanup funding has generally been proportional to the number of sites in the FUDS, active, and BRAC site categories. For example, the total number of BRAC sites requiring cleanup is about 17 percent of the total number of defense sites requiring cleanup, while the $440.2 million obligated to address BRAC sites in fiscal year 2008 is equivalent to about 25 percent of the total funds obligated for this purpose for all defense waste sites. GAO's past work has also shown that DOD's preliminary cost estimates for cleanup generally tend to rise significantly as more information becomes known about the level of contamination at a specific site. In addition, three factors can lead to delays in cleanup. They are (1) technological constraints that limit DOD's ability to detect and cleanup certain kinds of hazards, (2) prolonged negotiations with environmental regulators on the extent to which DOD's actions are in compliance with regulations and laws, and (3) the discovery of previously unknown hazards that can require additional cleanup, increase costs, and delay transfer of the property.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: I am pleased to be here today to discuss GAO’s recent work relating to the  Department of Defense’s (DOD) environmental remediation efforts at  former defense sites. These sites can pose hazards such as unsafe  buildings, a variety of toxic and radioactive wastes, and ordnance and  explosive compounds. As you know, DOD is obligated to ensure that  former and active defense sites are cleaned up to a level that is protective  of human health and the environment. To that end, DOD has established  the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) and identified  over 31,600 sites that are eligible for cleanup, including about 4,700  formerly used defense sites (FUDS), which were closed before October  2006; 21,500 sites on active installations; and 5,400 sites identified by  several Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) commissions. However,  the need to clean up environmental contaminants at bases closed under  the BRAC process has historically been a key impediment to the  expeditious transfer of unneeded property to other federal and nonfederal  parties who can put the property to new uses.
My testimony today is primarily based on our October 2009 report on  DOD’s efforts to clean up FUDS, which included a discussion on how DOD  allocates cleanup funding at all sites, including BRAC sites with defense  waste. I will describe DOD’s process for proposing funding for cleanup at  FUDS and other sites in the defense cleanup program, including BRAC  sites, and provide some information on the cleanup and funding status of  these sites as of the end of fiscal year 2008. In addition, my testimony will  cover some of the prior challenges that we have identified facing DOD’s  environmental restoration program overall and specifically with cleanup at  BRAC sites.
Our prior work was conducted in accordance with generally accepted  government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and  perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a  reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit  objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable  basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: Under DERP, DOD is required to conduct environmental restoration  activities at sites located on former and active defense properties that  were contaminated while under its jurisdiction. Program goals include the  identification, investigation, research and development, and cleanup of  contamination from hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants;  the correction of other environmental damage (such as detection and  disposal of unexploded ordnance) that creates an imminent and  substantial endangerment to public health or welfare or the environment;  and the demolition and removal of unsafe buildings and structures. Types  of environmental contaminants found at military installations include  solvents and corrosives; fuels; paint strippers and thinners; metals, such as  lead, cadmium, and chromium; and unique military substances, such as  nerve agents and unexploded ordnance.
DOD has undergone five BRAC rounds, with the most recent occurring in  2005. Under the first four rounds, in 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995, DOD  closed 97 major bases, had 55 major base realignments, and addressed  hundreds of minor closures and realignments. DOD reported that the first  four BRAC rounds reduced the size of its domestic infrastructure by about  20 percent and generated about $6.6 billion in net annual recurring savings  beginning in fiscal year 2001.
As a result of the 2005 BRAC decisions, DOD was slated to close an  additional 25 major bases, complete 32 major realignments, and complete  755 minor base closures and realignments. When the BRAC decisions were  made final in November 2005, the BRAC Commission had projected that  the implementation of these decisions would generate over $4 billion in  annual recurring net savings beginning in 2011. In accordance with BRAC  statutory authority, DOD must complete closure and realignment actions  by September 15, 2011—6 years following the date the President  transmitted his report on the BRAC recommendations to Congress.  Environmental cleanup and property transfer actions associated with  BRAC sites can exceed the 6-year time limit, having no deadline for  completion. As we have reported in the past, addressing the cleanup of  contaminated properties has been a key factor related to delays in  transferring unneeded BRAC property to other parties for reuse. DOD  officials have told us that they expect environmental cleanup to be less of  an impediment for the 2005 BRAC sites since the department now has a  more mature cleanup program in place to address environmental  contamination on its bases.
In assessing potential contamination and determining the degree of  cleanup required (on both active and closed bases), DOD must comply  with cleanup standards and processes under all applicable environmental  laws, regulations, and executive orders. The Comprehensive  Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980  (CERCLA) authorizes the President to conduct or cause to be conducted  cleanup actions at sites where there is a release or threatened release of  hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants which may present a  threat to public health and the environment. The Superfund Amendments  and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) amending CERCLA clarified that  federal agencies with such sites shall be subject to and comply with  CERCLA in the same manner as a private party, and DOD was  subsequently delegated response authority for its properties. To respond  to potentially contaminated sites on both active and closed bases, DOD  generally uses the CERCLA process, which includes the following phases  and activities, among others: preliminary assessment, site investigation,  remedial investigation and feasibility study, remedial design and remedial  action, and long-term monitoring.
SARA also required the Secretary of Defense to carry out the Defense  Environmental Restoration Program (DERP). Following SARA’s  enactment, DOD established DERP, which consists of two key  subprograms focused on environmental contamination: (1) the Installation  Restoration Program (IRP), which addresses the cleanup of hazardous  substances where they were released into the environment prior to  October 17, 1986; and (2) the Military Munitions Response Program  (MMRP), which addresses the cleanup of munitions, including unexploded  ordnance and the contaminants and metals related to munitions, where  they were released into the environment prior to September 30, 2002.  While DOD is authorized to conduct cleanups of hazardous substances  released after 1986 and munitions released after 2002, these activities are  not eligible for DERP funds but are instead considered “compliance”  cleanups and are typically funded by base operations and maintenance  accounts. Once a property is identified for transfer by a BRAC round,  DOD’s cleanups are funded by the applicable BRAC account.
While SARA had originally required the government to warrant that all  necessary cleanup actions had been taken before transferring property to  nonfederal ownership, the act was amended in 1996 to allow expedited  transfers of contaminated property. Now such property, under some  circumstances, can be transferred to nonfederal users before all remedial  action has been taken. However, certain conditions must exist before DOD  can exercise this early transfer authority; for example, the property must  be suitable for the intended reuse and the governor of the state must  concur with the transfer. Finally, DOD remains responsible for completing  all necessary response action, after which it must warrant that such work  has been completed.
section_title: Funding Levels and Cleanup Status for Active and BRAC Sites and FUDS
paragraphs: DOD uses the same method to propose funding for cleanup at active and  BRAC sites and FUDS; and cleanup funding is based on DERP goals and is  generally proportional to the number of sites in each of these categories.  Specifically, officials in the Military Departments, Defense Agencies, and  FUDS program who are responsible for environmental restoration at the  sites under their jurisdiction formulate cleanup budget proposals based on  instructions in DOD’s financial management regulation and DERP  environmental restoration performance goals. DOD’s DERP goals include  reducing risk to human health and the environment,    preparing BRAC properties to be environmentally suitable for transfer,    having final remedies in place and completing response actions, and  fulfilling other established milestones to demonstrate progress toward  meeting program performance goals.
DERP goals included target dates representing when the current inventory  of active and BRAC sites and FUDS are expected to complete the  preliminary assessment and site inspection phases, or achieve the remedy  in place or response complete (RIP/RC) milestone. In addition, Congress  has required the Secretary of Defense to establish specific performance  goals for MMRP sites.  Table 1 provides a summary of these goals for the  IRP and MMRP.
As the table indicates, BRAC sites have no established goals for  preliminary assessments or site inspections. For sites included under the  first four BRAC rounds, the goal is to reach the RIP/RC milestone at IRP  sites by 2015 and at MMRP sites by 2009. For sites included under the 2005  BRAC round, the goal is to reach the RIP/RC milestone at IRP sites by 2014  and at MMRP sites by 2017.
DOD’s military components plan cleanup actions that are required to meet  these goals at the installation or site level. DOD requires the components  to assess their inventory of BRAC and other sites by relative risk to help  make informed decisions about which sites to clean up first. Using these  relative risk categories, as well as other factors such as stakeholder  interest and mission needs, the components set more specific cleanup  targets each fiscal year to demonstrate progress and prepare a budget to  achieve those goals and targets.
The proposed budgets and obligations among site categories are also  influenced by the need to fund long-term management activities. While  DOD uses the number of sites achieving RIP/RC status as a primary  performance metric, sites that have reached this goal may still require  long-term management and, therefore, additional funding for a number of  years. Table 2 shows the completion status for active and BRAC sites and  FUDS, as of the end of fiscal year 2008.
Table 3 shows the completion status of BRAC sites and those that require  long term management under the IRP, MMRP, and the Building  Demolition/Debris Removal Program by military component, for fiscal  years 2004 through 2008.
DOD data show that, in applying the broad restoration goals,  performance goals, and targets, cleanup funding is generally  proportional to the number of sites in the active, BRAC, and FUDS  site categories. Table 4 shows the total DERP inventory of sites,  obligations, and proportions at the end of fiscal year 2008.
As the table indicates, the total number of BRAC sites requiring cleanup is  about 17 percent of the total number of defense sites, while the $440.2  million obligated to address BRAC sites in fiscal year 2008 is equivalent to  about 25 percent of the total funds obligated for cleaning up all defense  waste sites.
Since DERP was established, approximately $18.4 billion has been  obligated for environmental cleanup at individual sites on active military  bases, $7.7 billion for cleanup at sites located on installations designated  for closure under BRAC, and about $3.7 billion to clean up FUDS sites.  During fiscal years 2004 through 2008, about $4.8 billion was spent on  cleaning up sites on active bases, $1.8 billion for BRAC sites, and $1.1  billion for FUDS sites.
Table 5 provides DOD’s funding obligations for cleanup at BRAC sites by  military component and program category for fiscal years 2004 through  2008.
Table 6 shows DOD’s estimated cost to complete environmental cleanup  for sites located at active installations, BRAC installations, and FUDS  under the IRP, MMRP, and the Building Demolition and Debris Removal  Program for fiscal years 2004 through 2008.
Finally, table 7 shows the total inventory of BRAC sites and the number  ranked as high risk in the IRP and MMRP, by military component, for fiscal  years 2004 through 2008.
section_title: Challenges to DOD’s Environmental Cleanup Efforts
paragraphs: Our past work has also identified a number of challenges to DOD’s efforts  in undertaking environmental cleanup activities at defense sites, including  BRAC sites. For example, we have reported the following:    DOD’s preliminary cost estimates for environmental cleanup at specific  sites may not reflect the full cost of cleanup. That is, costs are generally  expected to increase as more information becomes known about the  extent of the cleanup needed at a site to make it safe enough to be reused  by others. We reported in 2007 that our experience with prior BRAC  rounds had shown that cost estimates tend to increase significantly once  more detailed studies and investigations are completed.
Environmental cleanup issues are unique to each site. However, we have  reported that three key factors can lead to delays in the cleanup and  transfer of sites. These factors are (1) technological constraints that limit  DOD’s ability to accurately identify, detect, and clean up unexploded  ordnance from a particular site, (2) prolonged negotiations between  environmental regulators and DOD about the extent to which DOD’s  actions are in compliance with environmental regulations and laws, and  (3) the discovery of previously undetected environmental contamination  that can result in the need for further cleanup, cost increases, and delays  in property transfer.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, while the data indicate that DOD has made  progress in cleaning up its contaminated sites, they also show that a  significant amount of work remains to be done. Given the large number of  sites that DOD must clean up, we recognize that it faces a significant  challenge. Addressing this challenge, however, is critical because  environmental cleanup has historically been a key impediment to the  expeditious transfer of unneeded property to other federal and nonfederal  parties who can put the property to new uses.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to  respond to any questions that you or Members of the Subcommittee may  have.
section_title: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public  Affairs may be found on the last page of this statement. For further  information about this testimony, please contact Anu Mittal at (202) 512- 3841 or mittala@gao.gov or John B. Stephenson at (202) 512-3841 or  stephensonj@gao.gov. Contributors to this testimony include Elizabeth  Beardsley, Antoinette Capaccio, Vincent Price, and John Smith.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the  United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety  without further permission from GAO. However, 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.