Four Key Factors Contributed to Early Cleanup

Four key factors contributed to the early completion of the physical  cleanup of Rocky Flats: (1) DOE and the contractor overcame several  major challenges identified in GAO’s 2001 report on the Rocky Flats  cleanup, (2) DOE and the site’s regulatory agencies agreed to use an  accelerated process to clean up the site, (3) a number of site-specific  characteristics combined to limit the scope and complexity of the cleanup  effort, and (4) DOE offered the contractor $560 million in total incentive  fees to finish the cleanup ahead of schedule and under cost. Cleanup of Rocky Flats Is Complete at a Cost of about $10 Billion, but Key Steps Remain Before the Planned Wildlife Refuge Will Open

The physical cleanup at Rocky Flats is complete, at a total cost (including  long-term costs) of about $10 billion; however, several regulatory steps  remain before land can be transferred to the Department of the Interior for  establishment of the wildlife refuge planned for the site. In December 2005, after  reviewing cleanup documentation, doing a final walk-through of the site,  and ensuring that the contractor had completed the remaining items, DOE  agreed that the contractor had fulfilled all of the cleanup actions specified  in the contract and the cleanup was complete. DOE anticipates that long-term costs will exceed $1.3 billion. Numerous Measures Were Taken to Assess the Cleanup’s Sufficiency, but DOE Could Improve Its Oversight of Data Quality and Clarify Its Verification Policy

Numerous measures were and are being taken to assess the sufficiency of  the cleanup; although these measures appear adequate, DOE did not carry  out some aspects of its oversight responsibilities. Nevertheless, DOE did not independently review the quality of these  data. Because the data from the  accelerated actions are crucial to the regulatory agencies’ final decision on  the sufficiency of the cleanup, we reviewed the controls in place to ensure  the quality of these data. The regulatory agencies’ approval meant that  the cleanup was sufficient and that no further accelerated action was  needed. Without independent assessments of the contractor’s data quality  control measures, DOE had no assurance that the controls were working as  intended. Although DOE captured and implemented at other sites some of the  lessons it learned at Rocky Flats, others risk being lost. As a result, DOE stands to  lose the benefits that such lessons have to offer. Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our review objectives were to determine the (1) factors that contributed to  the early completion of the physical cleanup at Rocky Flats; (2) work  remaining as well as total project costs, including long-term costs; (3)  measures in place to assess whether the cleanup achieved a level of  protection of public health and environment consistent with the Rocky  Flats Cleanup Agreement; and (4) lessons the Rocky Flats project may hold  for other Department of Energy (DOE) cleanup projects. In conducting our work, we visited the Rocky Flats site and reviewed  documents and data prepared by DOE, the Environmental Protection  Agency (EPA), the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment  (Colorado), the Department of the Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service  (FWS), the contractor, and various scientific organizations. 5.
Why GAO Did This Study

In 2001, when GAO reported on the cleanup of the Department of Energy's (DOE) Rocky Flats site, a former nuclear weapons production facility, the cleanup was behind schedule and over cost. In October 2005, the contractor declared that it had completed the cleanup much earlier and at less cost than DOE and the contractor had anticipated 5 years earlier. GAO was asked to determine the (1) factors that contributed to the cleanup's early completion, (2) remaining work and total costs, (3) measures to assess whether the cleanup achieved a level of protection of public health and environment consistent with the cleanup agreement, and (4) lessons the Rocky Flats cleanup may offer for other DOE cleanup projects.

What GAO Found

Four factors contributed to the early completion of Rocky Flats' cleanup: (1) DOE's and the contractor's ability to overcome numerous challenges, (2) the use of an accelerated cleanup process, (3) site-specific characteristics that limited the scope of the contamination, and (4) the contractor's financial incentive to finish the work quickly and safely. Although the cleanup is complete, its sufficiency has not yet been ascertained; key steps remain before the planned Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge that will occupy the site can open to the public. For example, in about November 2006, the regulatory agencies--the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment--plan to issue their joint final decision on the sufficiency of the cleanup and any risk posed by residual contaminants. The total cost of the cleanup, since 1995, is about $10 billion in constant 2005 dollars. This cost includes contract costs of about $7.7 billion (including contractor fees of about $630 million), long-term stewardship and pension liabilities estimated at about $1.3 billion, and other costs of nearly $1 billion. Although numerous measures in place to assess the cleanup appear adequate to judge the sufficiency of the cleanup, DOE did not effectively carry out some aspects of its oversight responsibilities. Among the assessment measures are completion of the regulatory process, activities undertaken to verify remedial actions, and reviews by independent and federal entities. The regulatory agencies have approved the cleanup of 360 areas of known or suspected contamination at the site. Data supporting the cleanup of these areas form the basis of regulatory decisions regarding the cleanup's sufficiency. Accordingly, we reviewed the contractor's controls intended to ensure the quality of these data and found them to be robust. However, DOE lacked assurance that the controls were working as intended because it did not independently assess the quality of these key data. One official told us that DOE was involved daily in reviewing documents and discussed with the contractor any data quality issues that arose. DOE has identified and implemented at other sites some lessons from Rocky Flats, but DOE has not systematically tracked lessons learned at all of its cleanup sites, thus potentially losing the benefits of such lessons.