DOD is responsible for cleaning up its releases of hazardous substances  under DERP, in accordance with CERCLA. In addition, the NCP requires  that the Corps, as the agency responsible for FUDS cleanup, conduct “5- year reviews” of sites not less than every 5 years after the start of remedial  action, when the chosen remedy does not allow for unlimited use and  unrestricted exposure. However, using this process has not  often led the Corps to re-examine sites after response actions are  completed to determine whether emerging contaminants are present or  need to be addressed. The Corps Considers New Information on Contaminants in its 5-Year Reviews, but Has Problems with its Review Procedures

Our analysis of information on the Corps’ 5-year reviews for FUDS in 4  divisions identified the following problems with the Corps’ review process:  (1) the reviews were not completed on time; (2) DOD and the Corps lack  accurate, complete information on these reviews; (3) Corps divisions are  inconsistent in their approaches to conducting 5-year reviews for sites  where they are recommended, but not required; and (4) the reports  resulting from these reviews did not always receive the technical review  by Corps experts as required by Corps policy. For example,  one division official told us that they have only recently begun completing  cleanup of HTRW sites, and another division official said that most of the  sites that might need a 5-year review have not yet been cleaned up. In responding to such requests, the Corps may review the  records or other original information for the property, as well as any  additional information provided by EPA, the state, or tribe concerning  potential DOD contamination. DOD Proposes Funding for Cleanup at FUDS, Active Sites, and BRAC Sites Based on DERP Goals, and Funding Is Proportional to Site Inventories

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. The Corps Uses Risk- Based Criteria to Prioritize FUDS for Cleanup, but Also Considers Other Factors

The Corps uses risk-based criteria and other factors to prioritize FUDS for  cleanup. While the  risk levels of sites are a significant factor in determining cleanup priorities,  high risk sites are not always addressed before low risk sites. According to DOD and Corps officials, the list of such sites may change  from year to year. DOD and Corps officials told us that in addition to considering a site’s risk  level, the Corps sets cleanup priorities based on program goals, which  have evolved over time. The Corps also recognizes in its FUDS program policy and FUDS program  management plan for FY 2009 that the concerns of regulators, the  Congress, and the public can influence the Corps’ decisions about which  sites to address first and can potentially result in decisions to fund  projects that are not high-risk. Table 9  shows the total amount that the Corps obligated for both direct and  indirect program management and support costs and Table 10 shows both  as a percentage of the total program management and support budget and  as a percentage of the overall amount obligated for the FUDS budget from  FY 2004 through 2008:  In FY 2006, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Environmental,  Safety and Occupational Health directed the FUDS program to reduce the  program management and support costs of the program in order to make  more funds available for cleanup projects. Several factors help to ensure that overall program management and  support funds are spent only on items the Corps has approved. Recommendations

To help ensure that the remedies at FUDS continue to protect human  health, safety, and the environment, we are making three  recommendations. We recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the  Corps to    conduct 5-year reviews for sites where emerging contaminants are present  and the cleanup will eventually allow unlimited site use and unrestricted  exposure, but will require more than 5 years to complete, consistent with  EPA’s guidance that such reviews are appropriate, even if not required;    modify its FUDS program information management system to allow  districts to more easily track information on 5-year reviews, and take steps  to ensure that the districts utilize this system to plan for 5-year reviews  and track progress on completing them; and    determine why districts have not always completed timely 5-year reviews  and provided all 5-year review reports to the Center of Expertise for  comment—consistent with Corps guidelines—and develop procedures  and controls to address these causes. Appendix II: Scope and Methodology

To determine how the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) addresses  emerging contaminants at formerly used defense sites (FUDS), and the  extent to which the Corps reevaluates sites to determine the need to  address emerging contaminants, we reviewed key laws, regulations,  policy, and guidance for the Department of Defense (DOD), the  Department of the Army, the Corps, and the Environmental Protection  Agency (EPA).
Why GAO Did This Study

The Department of Defense (DOD) estimates that cleaning up known hazards at the over 4,700 formerly used defense sites (FUDS)--sites transferred to other owners before October 1986--will require more than 50 years and cost about $18 billion. This estimate excludes any additional needed cleanup of emerging contaminants--generally, those not yet governed by a health standard. DOD delegated FUDS cleanup responsibility to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). In addition to FUDS, DOD is responsible for cleaning up about 21,500 sites on active bases and 5,400 sites on realigned or closed bases. The House Armed Services Committee directed GAO to examine (1) the extent to which the Corps reevaluates sites to identify emerging contaminants; (2) how DOD allocates cleanup funds; (3) how the Corps prioritizes FUDS for cleanup; and (4) FUDS program overhead costs. GAO analyzed nationwide FUDS property and project data; policies, guidance and budget documents; and interviewed DOD and Corps officials.

What GAO Found

The Corps has not often re-examined sites after they have been cleaned up to determine whether emerging contaminants are present or need to be addressed. Generally, the Corps reevaluates sites only when requested by states or others, or when reviewing the completed remedy to ensure its continuing protectiveness. Such reviews are required every 5 years for sites where the chosen remedy does not allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. Corps officials said that they had not received many requests to re-examine sites and few FUDS had required 5-year reviews. Reports on the 15 5-year reviews completed as of May 2009 within four Corps divisions indicated that the Corps has not consistently (1) conducted required 5-year reviews on time, (2) conducted reviews when they are not required but may be appropriate, as EPA recommends, and (3) submitted reports on these reviews for technical evaluation, as required by Corps policy. Also, DOD and the Corps lack accurate, complete information on the status of these reviews. Without timely, accurate, and complete reviews, the Corps cannot ensure that remedies continue to protect human health and the environment. DOD proposes funding to clean up defense sites based on the department's environmental restoration goals and obligations are generally proportional to the number of sites in each site category. Funding is directed toward reducing risks to human health and the environment, among other goals. The Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Defense Logistics Agency each determine the funding requirements to clean up sites based on these goals. The Corps prioritizes individual FUDS for cleanup on the basis of risk and other factors. The Corps assigns each site a risk level, considering such factors as the presence of hazards, the potential for human contact, and the concentrations of contaminants and their potential for migrating, among others. According to DOD officials, sites' risk levels are the single most important criterion in determining cleanup priorities. However, the Corps also takes into account specific FUDS program goals, and other factors--such as regulators' and the public's concerns--that can influence the Corps' decisions about which sites to address first. Consequently, high risk sites are not always addressed before low risk sites. Direct program management and support costs for the FUDS program have decreased slightly in recent years, mostly due to structural changes in the program. The Corps' obligations for FUDS direct program management and support costs have declined from 11.0 percent of total program obligations in fiscal year 2004 to 9.0 percent in fiscal year 2008. In addition, to further reduce certain components of these costs to make more funds available for FUDS cleanup, the Corps reduced the number of employees managing the program and the number of districts responsible for FUDS from 22 to 14. Furthermore, Corps officials told GAO that they have implemented a number of controls--such as assigning tracking codes--to ensure that program management and support funds are spent only on approved items.