Since  fiscal year 2000, EPA has added five DOD sites to the NPL. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Enforcement. EPA Evaluates All Potentially Contaminated DOD Sites for Listing, but Does Not Oversee Cleanup at Most Hazardous Waste DOD Sites

While EPA oversees and evaluates DOD’s preliminary assessments of all  DOD sites suspected of having a hazardous release, the agency has little to  no oversight of the cleanup of most of these sites because most are not on  the NPL. Few Hazardous Waste DOD Sites Considered for Listing Are Ultimately Placed on the NPL

Of the 985 DOD sites contaminated with hazardous substances, EPA  placed 140 sites—about 15 percent—on the NPL; the remaining 845 sites  are generally overseen by a cleanup authority other than EPA. EPA regional officials were unable to  provide a rationale for EPA’s decision to not list almost one-half of the 389  sites that we reviewed because site file documentation was inconclusive  or missing. More than a Decade after Listing, 11 DOD NPL Sites Do Not Have IAGs, Impeding EPA’s Ability to Enforce Cleanup Actions at Those Sites

Although EPA has IAGs in place with DOD for 129 of the 140 DOD sites on  the NPL, IAGs have not been finalized at the remaining 11 sites remaining. According to  DOD, some of these sites are nearly cleaned up. EPA Proposes Few Contaminated DOD Sites Based on EPA Policy and DOD’s Maturing Inventory of Hazardous Waste Sites

Since the 1990s, EPA has proposed fewer DOD sites for the NPL than in  previous years for three key reasons. First, EPA defers the majority of  DOD sites to other statutory authorities for cleanup under state oversight,  and to avoid duplicating efforts, it does not list these sites. Second, over  the years, DOD has discovered fewer hazardous substance releases,  resulting in fewer sites for assessment and potential proposal for the NPL. Since then, EPA has  generally not proposed listing contaminated DOD sites that are being  cleaned up under other federal or state programs. States May Object to EPA’s Proposal to List Contaminated DOD Sites

EPA policy recommends states’ governors to be included in the decision  whether to list sites on the NPL and, in cases where a state does not agree  that EPA should list a site, EPA’s policy recommends that a region work  closely with the state to resolve the state’s concerns. Four sites were not listed because the states’  governors did not support listing. Although these five sites were not listed,  EPA regional officials said that all five sites are being cleaned up, have a  remedy in place that is protective of human health and the environment, or  the site has been cleaned up to the point that it no longer meets the  requirements for placement on the NPL. Trichloroethylene (TCE) has been found in soil and  near groundwater. OMB  encouraged EPA to defer listing the site for 6 months to provide DOD with  time to address personnel and contractor changes and demonstrate  remediation progress. Although EPA  officials told us that cleanup at Chanute has progressed slowly, milestones  were met and EPA did not list the site. 4.) GAO staff who made major contributions to this  report are listed in appendix V.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

We were asked to determine (1) the extent of the Environmental  Protection Agency’s (EPA) oversight during assessment and cleanup at  Department of Defense (DOD) National Priority List (NPL) and non-NPL  sites and (2) why EPA has proposed fewer DOD sites for inclusion on the  NPL since the early 1990s. To examine the extent of EPA’s oversight during assessment and cleanup  of DOD NPL and non-NPL sites, we reviewed the Comprehensive  Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and  other legislation governing the cleanup of federal hazardous waste sites, as  well as EPA Superfund program policy and guidance, to determine the  roles and responsibilities of EPA and federal agencies, such as DOD, to  implement the CERCLA process and assess and clean up hazardous waste. We interviewed EPA and DOD officials on  contaminated DOD sites that EPA proposed for the NPL, why some were  not listed, and the status of cleanup at these sites.
Why GAO Did This Study

Prior to the 1980s and the passage of environmental legislation--particularly the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) governing environmental cleanup--Department of Defense (DOD) activities contaminated millions of acres of soil and water on and near DOD sites. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which enforces CERCLA, places the most contaminated sites on its National Priorities List (NPL) and requires that they be cleaned up in accordance with CERCLA. EPA has placed 140 DOD sites on the NPL. Disputes have recently arisen between EPA and DOD on agreements to clean up some of these sites. In addition, most sites were placed on the NPL before 1991; since fiscal year 2000, EPA has added five DOD sites. In this context, we agreed to determine (1) the extent of EPA's oversight during assessment and cleanup at DOD sites and (2) why EPA has proposed fewer DOD sites for the NPL since the early 1990s. GAO interviewed officials at EPA and DOD and reviewed site file documentation at four EPA regions.

What GAO Found

EPA evaluates DOD's preliminary assessments of contaminated DOD sites but has little to no oversight of the cleanup of the majority of these sites because most are not on the NPL. Of the 985 DOD sites requiring cleanup of hazardous substances, EPA has oversight authority of the 140 on the NPL; the remaining 845 non-NPL sites are overseen by other cleanup authorities--usually the states. Our review of 389 non-NPL DOD sites showed that EPA decided not to list 56 percent because it determined the condition of the sites did not satisfy the criteria for listing or because it deferred the sites to other programs, most often the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act--another federal statute that governs activities involving hazardous waste. However, EPA regional officials were unable to provide a rationale for not listing the remaining 44 percent because site files documenting EPA's decisions were missing or inconclusive. In addition, EPA has agreements with DOD for cleaning up 129 of the 140 NPL sites and is generally satisfied with the cleanup of these sites. However, DOD does not have agreements for the remaining 11 sites, even though they are required under CERCLA. It was not until more than 10 years after these sites were placed on the NPL that EPA, in 2007, pursued enforcement action against DOD by issuing administrative orders at 4 of the 11 sites. Since the mid-1990s, EPA has placed fewer DOD sites on the NPL than in previous years for three key reasons. First, EPA does not generally list DOD sites that are being addressed under other federal or state programs to avoid duplication. Second, DOD and EPA officials told us that, because DOD has been identifying and cleaning up hazardous releases for more than two decades, and improved its management of waste generated during its ongoing operations, DOD has discovered fewer hazardous substance releases in recent years, making fewer sites available for listing. Third, in a few instances, state officials or others have objected to EPA's proposal to list contaminated DOD sites, and EPA has usually declined to proceed further. For example, in five instances EPA proposed contaminated DOD sites for the NPL that were not ultimately placed on the list. At four of these sites, the states' governors did not support listing, citing the perceived stigma of inclusion on the NPL and potential adverse economic effect. EPA did not list the fifth site because, according to EPA regional officials, DOD objected and appealed to the Office of Management and Budget, which recommended deferring this listing for 6 months to give DOD time to address personnel and contractor changes and demonstrate remediation progress. EPA officials recently told us that cleanup has taken place at these sites and that it was unlikely or unclear whether they would qualify for placement on the NPL based on their current condition.