Remediation activities at DOE’s facilities are governed by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabilities Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, as amended. 3.) 4.) 5.) Because removal actions progress to actual cleanup more quickly than other CERCLA processes, removal actions can provide information about waste sites that is useful in focusing other types of remediation. Removal actions may also reduce the cumulative risk to human health and the environment. Various Factors Are Limiting the Use of Removal Actions

Our analysis and discussions with DOE and regulatory officials at the facilities we visited suggest that six factors limit the wider use of removal actions. Removal actions are not part of the agreements with regulators or DOE contractors. Some DOE and regulatory officials told us that they believe removal actions are intended for emergency situations or for planning relatively small, uncomplicated remediation projects, not for “mainstream” cleanups. Preference is given to streamlining full CERCLA and interim remedial planning approaches. However, planning and evaluation will still take significantly longer under streamlined CERCLA processes than under removal actions. Limited planning may increase the risk that an incorrect remedy will be chosen. Where appropriate, this action may include systematically evaluating each waste site where actual cleanup has not yet begun, including those sites where a lengthier assessment process is under way, to identify the sites where using a removal action would be feasible and cost-effective; seeking agreement to eliminate requirements in existing interagency agreements that favor lengthier review and assessment processes in exchange for a commitment to achieving significant cleanup progress through removal actions; and identifying and implementing incentives for DOE’s contractors that would increase the emphasis on, and the reward for, pursuing removal actions where appropriate.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Department of Energy's (DOE) use of removal actions to reduce the cost and accelerate the pace of environmental restoration projects.

What GAO Found

GAO found that: (1) removal actions save money and time compared with other remediation planning approaches; (2) the use of removal actions may provide information that is useful for other types of remediation, reduce the cumulative risk to human health and the environment, and reduce the size of sites under DOE control; (3) the use of removal actions at DOE facilities varies; (4) the use of removal actions is limited because removal actions are not part of interagency agreements with regulators or DOE contractors; (5) some officials believe that removal actions are intended for emergency situations or for planning small remediation projects; (6) officials at some sites are concentrating on streamlining Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabilities Act (CERCLA) and interim remedial planning approaches, but planning and evaluation will still take significantly longer under simpler CERCLA processes; and (7) limited planning may increase the risk that an incorrect remedy will be chosen.