Cities and States Would Likely Request Federal Assistance for Cleanup of Radiation- Contaminated Areas after RDD and IND Incidents, but Limited Federal Planning Exists for Recovering from Such Incidents

While state and local government responders would be expected to  respond first to a terrorist incident within their jurisdiction, they would  also expect that the federal government would be prepared to provide the  necessary assistance for them to expedite the recovery from such an  incident. Emergency management officials from 13 cities and the majority  of their respective states indicated in our survey that they would rely on  the federal government to conduct and fund all or almost all analysis and  cleanup activities associated with recovering from an RDD or IND incident  of the magnitude described in the National Planning Scenarios. Despite the anticipated reliance by city and state governments on the  federal government for analysis and cleanup activities following an RDD  or IND incident, FEMA has not developed a national disaster recovery  strategy or related plans to guide involvement of federal agencies in these  recovery activities, as directed by federal law and executive guidance. To  date, much federal attention has been given to developing a response  framework, with less attention to recovery. Moreover, DOE, EPA  and DOD are developing more detailed operational guidance on their own  based on the existing federal guidance. For example, DOE has supported  research on operational guidelines for implementation of protective  actions described in the FEMA guidance, EPA has drafted guidance for  the optimization process following RDD and IND incidents, and DOD has  established operational plans for consequence management following  terrorist incidents, including RDD and IND attacks. Federal agencies and local jurisdictions have been using the available  guidance as a basis for planning RDD and IND exercises to test the  adequacy of their plans and skills in a real-time, realistic environment to  evaluate their level of preparedness. However, officials with FEMA’s National  Exercise Directorate told us that only three of the RDD response exercises  had a recovery component. Insufficient Knowledge and Capability to Use Available Approaches for Cleanup of Radiation- Contaminated Areas Could Impede Efforts to Recover from RDD and IND Incidents

Although some federal agencies, such as DOE and EPA, have substantial  experience using various cleanup methods and technologies to address  radiation-contaminated areas, little is known about how these approaches  might be applied in an RDD or IND incident. According to a decontamination expert at Idaho  National Laboratory, for example, experience has shown that not selecting  the appropriate decontamination technologies can generate waste types  that are more difficult to remove than the original material and can create  more debris requiring disposal—leading to increased costs. For example, we found that  limitations in federal capabilities to complete some analysis and cleanup  activities might slow the recovery from an RDD or IND incident, including:  (1) characterizing the full extent of areas contaminated with radioactive  materials; (2) completing laboratory validation of contaminated areas and  levels of cleanup after applying decontamination approaches; and (3)  removing and disposing of radioactive debris and waste. City, State, and Federal Emergency Management Officials Have Several Suggestions to Improve Federal Recovery Preparedness for RDD and IND Incidents

Respondents from nearly all the cities and states we surveyed expressed  the need for a national disaster recovery strategy to address gaps and  overlaps in current federal guidance. For example, respondents from  some of the cities sought better guidance on monitoring radioactivity  levels, acceptable cleanup standards, and management of radioactive  waste. We  found that actions the United Kingdom reported taking to prepare for  recovery from RDD and IND incidents are similar to many of the  suggestions for improvement in federal preparedness that we obtained  through our survey of city, state, and federal regional office emergency  management officials in the United States. Issued a national handbook for radiation incidents in 2008. Conducted a full-scale RDD recovery exercise in 2008. The lessons learned from this exercise were  incorporated into the United Kingdom’s recovery strategy.
Why GAO Did This Study

A terrorist's use of a radiological dispersal device (RDD) or improvised nuclear device (IND) to release radioactive materials into the environment could have devastating consequences. The timely cleanup of contaminated areas, however, could speed the restoration of normal operations, thus reducing the adverse consequences from an incident. This testimony examines (1) the extent to which federal agencies are planning to fulfill their responsibilities to assist cities and their states in cleaning up areas contaminated with radioactive materials from RDD and IND incidents; (2) what is known about the federal government's capability to effectively cleanup areas contaminated with radioactive materials from RDD and IND incidents, and (3) suggestions from government emergency management officials on ways to improve federal preparedness to provide assistance to recover from RDD and IND incidents. We also discuss recovery activities in the United Kingdom. This testimony is based on our ongoing review of recovery preparedness issues for which we examined applicable federal laws and guidance; interviewed officials from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Department of Energy (DOE), and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); and surveyed emergency management officials from 13 large cities and their states, as well as FEMA and EPA regional office officials.

What GAO Found

DHS, through FEMA, is responsible for developing a comprehensive emergency management system to respond to and recover from natural disasters and terrorists attacks, including RDD and IND attacks. The response phase would involve evacuations and providing medical treatment to those who were injured; the recovery phase would include cleaning up the radioactive contamination from an attack in order to permit people to return to their homes and businesses. To date, much federal attention has been given to developing a response framework, with less attention to recovery. Our survey found that almost all cities and states would be so overwhelmed by an RDD or IND incident that they would rely on the federal government to conduct almost all analysis and cleanup activities that are essential first steps towards recovery. However, we found that the federal government has not sufficiently planned to undertake these activities. For example, FEMA has not issued a national disaster recovery strategy or plans for RDD and IND incidents as required by law. Existing federal guidance provides only limited direction for federal agencies to develop their own recovery plans and conduct exercises to test preparedness. Out of over 70 RDD and IND exercises conducted in the last 5 years, only three have included interagency recovery discussions following a response exercise. Although DOE and EPA have experience in the cleanup of small-scale radiation-contaminated areas, their lack of knowledge and capability to apply approaches to address the magnitude of an RDD or an IND incident could increase recovery costs and delay completion. According to anexpert at Idaho National Laboratory, experience has shown that not selecting the appropriate decontamination technologies can generate waste types that are more difficult to remove than the original material and can create more debris requiring disposal--leading to increased costs. Limitations in laboratory capacity to rapidly test thousands of material samples during cleanup, and uncertainty regarding where to dispose of radioactive debris could also slow the recovery process. At least two-thirds of the city, state, and federal respondents expressed concern about federal capability to provide the necessary analysis and cleanup actions to promote recovery after these incidents. Nearly all survey respondents had suggestions to improve federal recovery preparedness for RDD and IND incidents. For example, almost all the cities and states identified the need for a national disaster recovery strategy to address gaps and overlaps in federal guidance. All but three cities wanted additional guidance, for example, on monitoring radioactivity levels, cleanup standards, and management of radioactive waste. Most cities wanted more interaction with federal agencies and joint exercising to test recovery preparedness. Finally, our review of the United Kingdom's preparedness to recover from radiological terrorism showed that that country has already taken actions similar to those suggested by our survey respondents, such as issuing national recovery guidance, conducting a full-scale recovery exercise, and publishing a national handbook for radiation incidents.