Environmental Contamination
Information on the Funding and Cleanup Status of Defense Sites
Gao ID: GAO-10-547T March 17, 2010
Under the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP), the Department of Defense (DOD) is responsible for cleaning up about 5,400 sites on military bases that have been closed under the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process, as well as 21,500 sites on active bases and over 4,700 formerly used defense sites (FUDS), properties that DOD owned or controlled and transferred to other parties prior to October 1986. The cleanup of contaminants, such as hazardous chemicals or unexploded ordnance, at BRAC bases has been an impediment to the timely transfer of these properties to parties who can put them to new uses. The goals of DERP include (1) reducing risk to human health and the environment (2) preparing BRAC properties to be environmentally suitable for transfer (3) having final remedies in place and completing response actions and (4) fulfilling other established milestones to demonstrate progress toward meeting program performance goals. This testimony is based on prior work and discusses information on (1) how DOD allocates cleanup funding at all sites with defense waste and (2) BRAC cleanup status. It also summarizes other key issues that GAO has identified in the past that can impact DOD's environmental cleanup efforts.
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. Officials in the Military Departments, Defense Agencies, and FUDS program, who are responsible for executing the environmental restoration activities at their respective sites, formulate cleanup budget proposals using the instructions in DOD's financial management regulation and DERP environmental restoration performance goals. DERP's goals include target dates for reaching the remedy-in-place or response complete (RIP/RC) milestone. For example, for sites included under the first four BRAC rounds, the goal is to reach the RIP/RC milestone at sites with hazardous substances released before October 1986 by 2015 and for sites in the 2005 BRAC round by 2014. DOD's military components plan cleanup actions that are required to meet DERP goals at the installation or site level. DOD requires the components to assess their inventory of BRAC and other sites by relative risk to help make informed decisions about which sites to clean up first. Using these relative risk categories, as well as other factors, the components set more specific restoration targets each fiscal year to demonstrate progress and prepare a budget to achieve those goals and targets. DOD data show that, in applying the goals, and targets, cleanup funding has generally been proportional to the number of sites in the FUDS, active, and BRAC site categories. For example, the total number of BRAC sites requiring cleanup is about 17 percent of the total number of defense sites requiring cleanup, while the $440.2 million obligated to address BRAC sites in fiscal year 2008 is equivalent to about 25 percent of the total funds obligated for this purpose for all defense waste sites. GAO's past work has also shown that DOD's preliminary cost estimates for cleanup generally tend to rise significantly as more information becomes known about the level of contamination at a specific site. In addition, three factors can lead to delays in cleanup. They are (1) technological constraints that limit DOD's ability to detect and cleanup certain kinds of hazards, (2) prolonged negotiations with environmental regulators on the extent to which DOD's actions are in compliance with regulations and laws, and (3) the discovery of previously unknown hazards that can require additional cleanup, increase costs, and delay transfer of the property.
GAO-10-547T, Environmental Contamination: Information on the Funding and Cleanup Status of Defense Sites
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-10-547T
entitled 'Environmental Contamination: Information on the Funding and
Cleanup Status of Defense Sites' which was released on March 17, 2010.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility.
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features,
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters,
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
Testimony:
Before the Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs,
and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House of
Representatives:
For Release on Delivery:
Expected at 10:00 a.m. EDT:
Wednesday, March 17, 2010:
Environmental Contamination:
Information on the Funding and Cleanup Status of Defense Sites:
Statement of Anu Mittal, Director:
Natural Resources and Environment:
GAO-10-547T:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-10-547T, testimony before the Subcommittee on
Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies,
Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives.
Why GAO Did This Study:
Under the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP), the
Department of Defense (DOD) is responsible for cleaning up about 5,400
sites on military bases that have been closed under the Base
Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process, as well as 21,500 sites on
active bases and over 4,700 formerly used defense sites (FUDS),
properties that DOD owned or controlled and transferred to other
parties prior to October 1986. The cleanup of contaminants, such as
hazardous chemicals or unexploded ordnance, at BRAC bases has been an
impediment to the timely transfer of these properties to parties who
can put them to new uses. The goals of DERP include (1) reducing risk
to human health and the environment (2) preparing BRAC properties to
be environmentally suitable for transfer (3) having final remedies in
place and completing response actions and (4) fulfilling other
established milestones to demonstrate progress toward meeting program
performance goals.
This testimony is based on prior work and discusses information on (1)
how DOD allocates cleanup funding at all sites with defense waste and
(2) BRAC cleanup status. It also summarizes other key issues that GAO
has identified in the past that can impact DOD‘s environmental cleanup
efforts.
What GAO Found:
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. Officials in the Military Departments, Defense Agencies,
and FUDS program, who are responsible for executing the environmental
restoration activities at their respective sites, formulate cleanup
budget proposals using the instructions in DOD's financial management
regulation and DERP environmental restoration performance goals.
DERP‘s goals include target dates for reaching the remedy-in-place or
response complete (RIP/RC) milestone. For example, for sites included
under the first four BRAC rounds, the goal is to reach the RIP/RC
milestone at sites with hazardous substances released before October
1986 by 2015 and for sites in the 2005 BRAC round by 2014. DOD‘s
military components plan cleanup actions that are required to meet
DERP goals at the installation or site level. DOD requires the
components to assess their inventory of BRAC and other sites by
relative risk to help make informed decisions about which sites to
clean up first. Using these relative risk categories, as well as other
factors, the components set more specific restoration targets each
fiscal year to demonstrate progress and prepare a budget to achieve
those goals and targets.
DOD data show that, in applying the goals, and targets, cleanup
funding has generally been proportional to the number of sites in the
FUDS, active, and BRAC site categories. For example, the total number
of BRAC sites requiring cleanup is about 17 percent of the total
number of defense sites requiring cleanup, while the $440.2 million
obligated to address BRAC sites in fiscal year 2008 is equivalent to
about 25 percent of the total funds obligated for this purpose for all
defense waste sites.
GAO‘s past work has also shown that DOD‘s preliminary cost estimates
for cleanup generally tend to rise significantly as more information
becomes known about the level of contamination at a specific site. In
addition, three factors can lead to delays in cleanup. They are (1)
technological constraints that limit DOD‘s ability to detect and
cleanup certain kinds of hazards, (2) prolonged negotiations with
environmental regulators on the extent to which DOD‘s actions are in
compliance with regulations and laws, and (3) the discovery of
previously unknown hazards that can require additional cleanup,
increase costs, and delay transfer of the property.
View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-547T] or key
components. For more information, contact Anu Mittal at (202) 512-3841
or mittala@gao.gov, or John B. Stephenson at (202) 512-3841 or
stephensonj@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
I am pleased to be here today to discuss GAO's recent work relating to
the Department of Defense's (DOD) environmental remediation efforts at
former defense sites. These sites can pose hazards such as unsafe
buildings, a variety of toxic and radioactive wastes, and ordnance and
explosive compounds. As you know, DOD is obligated to ensure that
former and active defense sites are cleaned up to a level that is
protective of human health and the environment. To that end, DOD has
established the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) and
identified over 31,600 sites that are eligible for cleanup, including
about 4,700 formerly used defense sites (FUDS),[Footnote 1] which were
closed before October 2006; 21,500 sites on active installations; and
5,400 sites identified by several Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
commissions.[Footnote 2] However, the need to clean up environmental
contaminants at bases closed under the BRAC process has historically
been a key impediment to the expeditious transfer of unneeded property
to other federal and nonfederal parties who can put the property to
new uses.
My testimony today is primarily based on our October 2009 report on
DOD's efforts to clean up FUDS, which included a discussion on how DOD
allocates cleanup funding at all sites, including BRAC sites with
defense waste.[Footnote 3] I will describe DOD's process for proposing
funding for cleanup at FUDS and other sites in the defense cleanup
program, including BRAC sites, and provide some information on the
cleanup and funding status of these sites as of the end of fiscal year
2008. In addition, my testimony will cover some of the prior
challenges that we have identified facing DOD's environmental
restoration program overall and specifically with cleanup at BRAC
sites.[Footnote 4]
Our prior work was conducted in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan
and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to
provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on
our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a
reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit
objectives.
Background:
Under DERP, DOD is required to conduct environmental restoration
activities at sites located on former and active defense properties
that were contaminated while under its jurisdiction. Program goals
include the identification, investigation, research and development,
and cleanup of contamination from hazardous substances, pollutants,
and contaminants; the correction of other environmental damage (such
as detection and disposal of unexploded ordnance) that creates an
imminent and substantial endangerment to public health or welfare or
the environment; and the demolition and removal of unsafe buildings
and structures. Types of environmental contaminants found at military
installations include solvents and corrosives; fuels; paint strippers
and thinners; metals, such as lead, cadmium, and chromium; and unique
military substances, such as nerve agents and unexploded ordnance.
DOD has undergone five BRAC rounds, with the most recent occurring in
2005. Under the first four rounds, in 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995, DOD
closed 97 major bases, had 55 major base realignments,[Footnote 5] and
addressed hundreds of minor closures and realignments. DOD reported
that the first four BRAC rounds reduced the size of its domestic
infrastructure by about 20 percent and generated about $6.6 billion in
net annual recurring savings beginning in fiscal year 2001.
As a result of the 2005 BRAC decisions, DOD was slated to close an
additional 25 major bases, complete 32 major realignments, and
complete 755 minor base closures and realignments. When the BRAC
decisions were made final in November 2005, the BRAC Commission had
projected that the implementation of these decisions would generate
over $4 billion in annual recurring net savings beginning in 2011. In
accordance with BRAC statutory authority, DOD must complete closure
and realignment actions by September 15, 2011--6 years following the
date the President transmitted his report on the BRAC recommendations
to Congress.[Footnote 6] Environmental cleanup and property transfer
actions associated with BRAC sites can exceed the 6-year time limit,
having no deadline for completion. As we have reported in the past,
[Footnote 7] addressing the cleanup of contaminated properties has
been a key factor related to delays in transferring unneeded BRAC
property to other parties for reuse. DOD officials have told us that
they expect environmental cleanup to be less of an impediment for the
2005 BRAC sites since the department now has a more mature cleanup
program in place to address environmental contamination on its bases.
In assessing potential contamination and determining the degree of
cleanup required (on both active and closed bases), DOD must comply
with cleanup standards and processes under all applicable
environmental laws, regulations, and executive orders. The
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
of 1980 (CERCLA)[Footnote 8] authorizes the President to conduct or
cause to be conducted cleanup actions at sites where there is a
release or threatened release of hazardous substances, pollutants or
contaminants which may present a threat to public health and the
environment. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
(SARA) amending CERCLA clarified that federal agencies with such sites
shall be subject to and comply with CERCLA in the same manner as a
private party,[Footnote 9] and DOD was subsequently delegated response
authority for its properties.[Footnote 10] To respond to potentially
contaminated sites on both active and closed bases, DOD generally uses
the CERCLA process, which includes the following phases and
activities, among others: preliminary assessment, site investigation,
remedial investigation and feasibility study, remedial design and
remedial action, and long-term monitoring.
SARA also required the Secretary of Defense to carry out the Defense
Environmental Restoration Program (DERP).[Footnote 11] Following
SARA's enactment, DOD established DERP, which consists of two key
subprograms focused on environmental contamination: (1) the
Installation Restoration Program (IRP), which addresses the cleanup of
hazardous substances where they were released into the environment
prior to October 17, 1986; and (2) the Military Munitions Response
Program (MMRP), which addresses the cleanup of munitions, including
unexploded ordnance and the contaminants and metals related to
munitions, where they were released into the environment prior to
September 30, 2002.[Footnote 12] While DOD is authorized to conduct
cleanups of hazardous substances released after 1986 and munitions
released after 2002, these activities are not eligible for DERP funds
but are instead considered "compliance" cleanups and are typically
funded by base operations and maintenance accounts. Once a property is
identified for transfer by a BRAC round, DOD's cleanups are funded by
the applicable BRAC account.
While SARA had originally required the government to warrant that all
necessary cleanup actions had been taken before transferring property
to nonfederal ownership, the act was amended in 1996 to allow
expedited transfers of contaminated property.[Footnote 13] Now such
property, under some circumstances, can be transferred to nonfederal
users before all remedial action has been taken. However, certain
conditions must exist before DOD can exercise this early transfer
authority; for example, the property must be suitable for the intended
reuse and the governor of the state must concur with the transfer.
Finally, DOD remains responsible for completing all necessary response
action, after which it must warrant that such work has been completed.
Funding Levels and Cleanup Status for Active and BRAC Sites and FUDS:
DOD uses the same method to propose funding for cleanup at active and
BRAC sites and FUDS; and cleanup funding is based on DERP goals and is
generally proportional to the number of sites in each of these
categories. Specifically, officials in the Military Departments,
Defense Agencies, and FUDS program who are responsible for
environmental restoration at the sites under their jurisdiction
formulate cleanup budget proposals based on instructions in DOD's
financial management regulation and DERP environmental restoration
performance goals.[Footnote 14] DOD's DERP goals include:
* reducing risk to human health and the environment,
* preparing BRAC properties to be environmentally suitable for
transfer,
* having final remedies in place and completing response actions, and:
* fulfilling other established milestones to demonstrate progress
toward meeting program performance goals.
DERP goals included target dates representing when the current
inventory of active and BRAC sites and FUDS are expected to complete
the preliminary assessment and site inspection phases, or achieve the
remedy in place or response complete (RIP/RC) milestone. In addition,
Congress has required the Secretary of Defense to establish specific
performance goals for MMRP sites.[Footnote 15] Table 1 provides a
summary of these goals for the IRP and MMRP.
Table 1: Summary of DERP Goals for IRP and MMRP:
Cleanup phase or milestone: Preliminary assessment;
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
IRP: Active: No goal[A];
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
IRP: BRAC: No goal[A];
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
IRP: FUDS: No goal[A];
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
MMRP: Active: 2007[B];
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
MMRP: BRAC: No goal;
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
MMRP: FUDS: 2007[B,F].
Cleanup phase or milestone: Site inspections;
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
IRP: Active: No goal[A];
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
IRP: BRAC: No goal[A];
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
IRP: FUDS: No goal[A];
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
MMRP: Active: 2010[B];
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
MMRP: BRAC: No goal;
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
MMRP: FUDS: 2010[B].
Cleanup phase or milestone: Remedy in place or response complete[C];
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
IRP: Active: 2014;
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
IRP: BRAC: 2014 (BRAC 2005)[D];
2015 (Legacy BRAC)[D];
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
IRP: FUDS: 2020;
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
MMRP: Active: 2020;
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
MMRP: BRAC: 2009 (Legacy BRAC)[B,D];
2017 (BRAC 2005)[B,D];
Target year for completing cleanup phase or milestone for all sites:
MMRP: FUDS: No goal[E].
Source: DOD-provided data, DOD Financial Management Regulation,
7000.14-R, Vol. 2B, Ch. 13, October 2008.
[A] Because IRP is more mature than MMRP, DOD's goals for IRP are
focused on achieving RIP/RC.
[B] Goals for MMRP sites contained in P.L. No. 109-364 § 313, 120
Stat. 2083, 2138; DOD Financial Management Regulation 7000.14-R, Vol.
2B, Ch. 13, October 2008; and DOD Defense Environmental Programs
Annual Report to Congress, FY 2008, Appendix K. The statute requires
the Secretary of Defense to set a RIP/RC date for active, BRAC 2005,
and FUDS.
[C] RIP/RC targets apply to all IRP and MMRP sites, with the exception
of MMRP sites at FUDS, which do not have a RIP/RC goal yet.
[D] Congress enacted legislation that instituted five separate BRAC
rounds in 1988, 1991, 1993, 1995, and 2005. "Legacy BRAC" refers to
the base closure rounds in 1988, 1991, 1993, and 1995. The most
current closures are being conducted under the "2005 BRAC" round.
[E] DOD has not yet set a RIP/RC date for FUDS MMRP sites. In fiscal
year 2009, the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) began to develop a long-
term strategy for MMRP sites at FUDS.
[F] The Corps completed preliminary assessments at 99 percent of FUDS
MMRP sites by the end of fiscal year 2008.
[End of table]
As the table indicates, BRAC sites have no established goals for
preliminary assessments or site inspections. For sites included under
the first four BRAC rounds, the goal is to reach the RIP/RC milestone
at IRP sites by 2015 and at MMRP sites by 2009. For sites included
under the 2005 BRAC round, the goal is to reach the RIP/RC milestone
at IRP sites by 2014 and at MMRP sites by 2017.
DOD's military components plan cleanup actions that are required to
meet these goals at the installation or site level. DOD requires the
components to assess their inventory of BRAC and other sites by
relative risk to help make informed decisions about which sites to
clean up first. Using these relative risk categories, as well as other
factors such as stakeholder interest and mission needs, the components
set more specific cleanup targets each fiscal year to demonstrate
progress and prepare a budget to achieve those goals and targets.
The proposed budgets and obligations among site categories are also
influenced by the need to fund long-term management activities. While
DOD uses the number of sites achieving RIP/RC status as a primary
performance metric, sites that have reached this goal may still
require long-term management and, therefore, additional funding for a
number of years. Table 2 shows the completion status for active and
BRAC sites and FUDS, as of the end of fiscal year 2008.
Table 2: Completion Status of Sites, Fiscal Year 2008:
Status of sites: Sites that have reached response complete status;
Active: 16,810;
BRAC: 3,953;
FUDS: 2,682.
Status of sites: Sites that have not reached response complete status;
Active: 4,703;
BRAC: 1,492;
FUDS: 2,023.
Status of sites: Sites that have reached response complete status but
still require long-term management;
Active: 760;
BRAC: 440;
FUDS: 55.
Source: GAO analysis of DOD-provided data.
[End of table]
Table 3 shows the completion status of BRAC sites and those that
require long term management under the IRP, MMRP, and the Building
Demolition/Debris Removal Program by military component, for fiscal
years 2004 through 2008.
Table 3: BRAC Sites Cleanup Completion Status for Fiscal Years 2004
through 2008:
Program category: IRP sites that have achieved response complete
status[A];
Fiscal years: 2004;
Sites by military component: Army: 1,710;
Sites by military component: Navy: 899;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 1,073;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 153;
Total: 3,835.
Fiscal years: 2005;
Sites by military component: Army: 1,744;
Sites by military component: Navy: 920;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 1,127;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 157;
Total: 3,948.
Fiscal years: 2006;
Sites by military component: Army: 1,781;
Sites by military component: Navy: 914;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 1,179;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 157;
Total: 4,031.
Fiscal years: 2007;
Sites by military component: Army: 1,767;
Sites by military component: Navy: 422;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 1,226;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 157;
Total: 3,572.
Fiscal years: 2008;
Sites by military component: Army: 1,778;
Sites by military component: Navy: 558;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 1,260;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 157;
Total: 3,753.
Program category: IRP sites that have not achieved response complete
status;
Fiscal years: 2004;
Sites by military component: Army: 181;
Sites by military component: Navy: 164;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 641;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 11;
Total: 997.
Fiscal years: 2005;
Sites by military component: Army: 149;
Sites by military component: Navy: 174;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 587;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 7;
Total: 917.
Fiscal years: 2006;
Sites by military component: Army: 186;
Sites by military component: Navy: 210;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 576;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 7;
Total: 979.
Fiscal years: 2007;
Sites by military component: Army: 209;
Sites by military component: Navy: 707;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 583;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 7;
Total: 1,506.
Fiscal years: 2008;
Sites by military component: Army: 221;
Sites by military component: Navy: 572;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 549;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 7;
Total: 1,349.
Program category: IRP sites that have achieved response complete
status but remain under long-term management;
Fiscal years: 2004;
Sites by military component: Army: 51;
Sites by military component: Navy: 48;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 84;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 183.
Fiscal years: 2005;
Sites by military component: Army: 56;
Sites by military component: Navy: 46;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 82;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 184.
Fiscal years: 2006;
Sites by military component: Army: 69;
Sites by military component: Navy: 40;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 272;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 381.
Fiscal years: 2007;
Sites by military component: Army: 80;
Sites by military component: Navy: 16;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 289;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 385.
Fiscal years: 2008;
Sites by military component: Army: 84;
Sites by military component: Navy: 14;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 308;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 17;
Total: 423.
Program category: MMRP sites that have achieved response complete
status;
Fiscal years: 2004;
Sites by military component: Army: 120;
Sites by military component: Navy: 3;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 0;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 123.
Fiscal years: 2005;
Sites by military component: Army: 109;
Sites by military component: Navy: 5;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 0;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 114.
Fiscal years: 2006;
Sites by military component: Army: 118;
Sites by military component: Navy: 4;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 0;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 122.
Fiscal years: 2007;
Sites by military component: Army: 87;
Sites by military component: Navy: 1;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 92;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 180.
Fiscal years: 2008;
Sites by military component: Army: 93;
Sites by military component: Navy: 5;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 102;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 200.
Program category: MMRP sites that have not achieved response complete
status;
Fiscal years: 2004;
Sites by military component: Army: 53;
Sites by military component: Navy: 16;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 126;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 195.
Fiscal years: 2005;
Sites by military component: Army: 64;
Sites by military component: Navy: 14;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 126;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 204.
Fiscal years: 2006;
Sites by military component: Army: 99;
Sites by military component: Navy: 26;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 126;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 251.
Fiscal years: 2007;
Sites by military component: Army: 91;
Sites by military component: Navy: 31;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 35;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 157.
Fiscal years: 2008;
Sites by military component: Army: 91;
Sites by military component: Navy: 27;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 25;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 143.
Program category: MMRP sites that have achieved response complete
status but remain under long term-management;
Fiscal years: 2004;
Sites by military component: Army: 2;
Sites by military component: Navy: 0;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 0;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 2.
Fiscal years: 2005;
Sites by military component: Army: 6;
Sites by military component: Navy: 0;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 0;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 6.
Fiscal years: 2006;
Sites by military component: Army: 11;
Sites by military component: Navy: 0;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 0;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 11.
Fiscal years: 2007;
Sites by military component: Army: 9;
Sites by military component: Navy: 0;
Sites by military component: Air Force: 8;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 17.
Fiscal years: Fiscal years: 2008;
Sites by military component: Army: Army: 10;
Sites by military component: Navy: Navy: 0;
Sites by military component: Air Force: Air Force: 7;
Sites by military component: Defense Logistics Agency: Defense
Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: Total: 17.
Source: GAO analysis of DOD data.
[A] Building Demolition and Debris Removal sites are included.
[End of table]
DOD data show that, in applying the broad restoration goals,
performance goals, and targets, cleanup funding is generally
proportional to the number of sites in the active, BRAC, and FUDS site
categories. Table 4 shows the total DERP inventory of sites,
obligations, and proportions at the end of fiscal year 2008.
Table 4: Inventory of Sites, Obligations, and Proportions, Fiscal Year
2008:
Total number of sites;
Active: Number/amount: 21,513;
Active: Percentage of total: 68;
BRAC: Number/amount: 5,445;
BRAC: Percentage of total: 17;
FUDS: Number/amount: 4,705;
FUDS: Percentage of total: 15;
Totals: Number/amount: 31,663;
Totals: Percentage of total: 100.
Amount obligated[A];
Active: Number/amount: $1,056.1 million;
Active: Percentage of total: 61;
BRAC: Number/amount: $440.2 million;
BRAC: Percentage of total: 25;
FUDS: Number/amount: $245.4 million;
FUDS: Percentage of total: 14;
Totals: Number/amount: $1,741.7 million;
Totals: Percentage of total: 100.
Source: GAO analysis of DOD-provided data.
[A] The amounts obligated are for cleanup activities for each category
under the IRP, MMRP, and Building Demolition/Debris Removal programs.
[End of table]
As the table indicates, the total number of BRAC sites requiring
cleanup is about 17 percent of the total number of defense sites,
while the $440.2 million obligated to address BRAC sites in fiscal
year 2008 is equivalent to about 25 percent of the total funds
obligated for cleaning up all defense waste sites.[Footnote 16]
Since DERP was established, approximately $18.4 billion has been
obligated for environmental cleanup at individual sites on active
military bases, $7.7 billion for cleanup at sites located on
installations designated for closure under BRAC, and about $3.7
billion to clean up FUDS sites. During fiscal years 2004 through 2008,
about $4.8 billion was spent on cleaning up sites on active bases,
$1.8 billion for BRAC sites, and $1.1 billion for FUDS sites.[Footnote
17]
Table 5 provides DOD's funding obligations for cleanup at BRAC sites
by military component and program category for fiscal years 2004
through 2008.
Table 5: DOD's Obligations for Cleanup at BRAC Sites under the IRP and
MMRP, Fiscal Years 2004 through 2008:
Program category: IRP;
Fiscal years: 2004;
Military component: Army: $18.3 million;
Military component: Navy: $120.1 million;
Military component: Air Force: $146.0 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $7.3 million;
Total[A]: $291.7 million.
Fiscal years: 2005;
Military component: Army: $56.5 million;
Military component: Navy: $72.5 million;
Military component: Air Force: $100.3 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $8.3 million;
Total[A]: $237.6 million.
Fiscal years: 2006;
Military component: Army: $43.2 million;
Military component: Navy: $219.5 million;
Military component: Air Force: $81.0 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $4.3 million;
Total[A]: $348.0 million.
Fiscal years: 2007;
Military component: Army: $55.2 million;
Military component: Navy: $163.4 million;
Military component: Air Force: $85.4 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $5.0 million;
Total[A]: $308.9 million.
Fiscal years: 2008;
Military component: Army: $42.0 million;
Military component: Navy: $256.2 million;
Military component: Air Force: $91.1 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $1.6 million;
Total[A]: $390.8 million.
Program category: MMRP;
Fiscal years: 2004;
Military component: Army: $22.2 million;
Military component: Navy: $0.6 million;
Military component: Air Force: $0.2 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $0.0;
Total[A]: $23.0 million.
Fiscal years: 2005;
Military component: Army: $17.5 million;
Military component: Navy: $4.6 million;
Military component: Air Force: $0.0;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $0.0;
Total[A]: $22.1 million.
Fiscal years: 2006;
Military component: Army: $46.1 million;
Military component: Navy: $6.8 million;
Military component: Air Force: $0.0;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $0.0;
Total[A]: $52.8 million.
Fiscal years: 2007;
Military component: Army: $54.0 million;
Military component: Navy: $7.6 million;
Military component: Air Force: $0.2 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $0.0;
Total[A]: $61.8 million.
Fiscal years: 2008;
Military component: Army: $22.4 million;
Military component: Navy: $25.2 million;
Military component: Air Force: $1.8 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $0.0;
Total[A]: $49.4 million.
Program category: Program management and support[B];
Fiscal years: 2004;
Military component: Army: [Empty];
Military component: Navy: [Empty];
Military component: Air Force: [Empty];
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: [Empty];
Total[A]: [Empty].
Fiscal years: 2005;
Military component: Army: $16.1 million;
Military component: Navy: $25.5 million;
Military component: Air Force: $41.7 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $0.0;
Total[A]: $83.3 million.
Fiscal years: 2006;
Military component: Army: $12.1 million;
Military component: Navy: $30.2 million;
Military component: Air Force: $40.5 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $0.2 million;
Total[A]: $83.0 million.
Fiscal years: 2007;
Military component: Army: $13.5 million;
Military component: Navy: $23.8 million;
Military component: Air Force: $29.4 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $1.0 million;
Total[A]: $67.7 million.
Fiscal years: 2008;
Military component: Army: $14.2 million;
Military component: Navy: $27.5 million;
Military component: Air Force: $36.2 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $2.1 million;
Total[A]: $80.0 million.
Program category: Total obligations;
Fiscal years: 2004;
Military component: Army: $40.6 million;
Military component: Navy: $120.7 million;
Military component: Air Force: $146.2 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $7.3 million;
Total[A]: $314.7 million.
Fiscal years: 2005;
Military component: Army: $90.1 million;
Military component: Navy: $102.5 million;
Military component: Air Force: $142.1 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $8.3 million;
Total[A]: $342.9 million.
Fiscal years: 2006;
Military component: Army: $101.4 million;
Military component: Navy: $256.4 million;
Military component: Air Force: $121.5 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $4.5 million;
Total[A]: $483.9 million.
Fiscal years: 2007;
Military component: Army: $122.7 million;
Military component: Navy: $194.8 million;
Military component: Air Force: $114.9 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $6.0 million;
Total[A]: $438.3 million.
Fiscal years: 2008;
Military component: Army: $78.6 million;
Military component: Navy: $308.8 million;
Military component: Air Force: $129.0 million;
Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: $3.7 million;
Total[A]: Total[A]: $520.2 million.
Source: GAO's analysis of DOD data.
[A] Due to rounding, subtotals may not equal total obligations.
[B] Program management and support includes administrative and
overhead expenses. These obligations were not reported in DOD's DERP
information system until fiscal year 2005.
[End of table]
Table 6 shows DOD's estimated cost to complete environmental cleanup
for sites located at active installations, BRAC installations, and
FUDS under the IRP, MMRP, and the Building Demolition and Debris
Removal Program for fiscal years 2004 through 2008.
Table 6: DOD's Estimated Costs to Complete Environmental Cleanup for
Active, BRAC, and FUDS sites by Program Category, Fiscal Years 2004
through 2008:
Active sites[A]:
Fiscal Year: 2004;
Program category: IRP: $9.0 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $7.3 billion;
Total: $16.3 billion.
Fiscal Year: 2005;
Program category: IRP: $8.2 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $6.0 billion;
Total: $14.2 billion.
Fiscal Year: 2006;
Program category: IRP: $7.5 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $5.1 billion;
Total: $12.6 billion.
Fiscal Year: 2007;
Program category: IRP: $6.9 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $5.3 billion;
Total: $12.2 billion.
Fiscal Year: 2008;
Program category: IRP: $6.3 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $4.9 billion;
Total: BRAC sites: $11.3 billion.
BRAC sites:
Fiscal Year: 2004;
Program category: IRP: $2.7 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $0.5 billion;
Total: $3.2 billion.
Fiscal Year: 2005;
Program category: IRP: $2.6 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $1.2 billion;
Total: $3.8 billion.
Fiscal Year: 2006;
Program category: IRP: $3.0 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $0.9 billion;
Total: $3.9 billion.
Fiscal Year: 2007;
Program category: IRP: $2.9 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $0.9 billion;
Total: $3.9 billion.
Fiscal Year: 2008;
Program category: IRP: $2.8 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $1.0 billion;
Total: FUDS[A]: $3.7 billion.
FUDS[A];
Fiscal Year: 2004;
Program category: IRP: $3.6 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $12.2 billion;
Total: $15.8 billion.
Fiscal Year: 2005;
Program category: IRP: $3.5 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $12.9 billion;
Total: $16.4 billion.
Fiscal Year: 2006;
Program category: IRP: $3.4 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $12.6 billion;
Total: $16.1 billion.
Fiscal Year: 2007;
Program category: IRP: $3.2 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $13.0 billion;
Total: $16.3v.
Fiscal Year: 2008;
Program category: IRP: $2.8 billion;
Program category: MMRP: $13.5 billion;
Total: $16.2 billion.
Source: GAO's analysis of DOD data.
Note: Does not include program management and support costs. Totals
may not add due to rounding.
[A] Building Demolition and Debris Removal costs estimates are
included in the IRP category.
[End of table]
Finally, table 7 shows the total inventory of BRAC sites and the
number ranked as high risk in the IRP and MMRP, by military component,
for fiscal years 2004 through 2008.
Table 7: Inventory for BRAC Sites, Fiscal Years 2004 through 2008:
IRP[A]:
Fiscal year: 2004;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 1,891;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 1,063;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 1,714;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 164;
Total: 4,832.
Fiscal year: 2005;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 1,893;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 1,094;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 1,714;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 164;
Total: 4,865.
Fiscal year: 2006;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 1,967;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 1,124;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 1,755;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 164;
Total: 5,010.
Fiscal year: 2007;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 1,976;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 1,129;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 1,809;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 164;
Total: 5,078.
Fiscal year: 2008;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 1,999;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 1,130;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 1,809;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 164;
Total: 5,102.
MMRP;
Fiscal year: 2004;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 173;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 19;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 126;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 318.
Fiscal year: 2005;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 173;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 19;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 126;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 318.
Fiscal year: 2006;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 217;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 30;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 126;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 373.
Fiscal year: 2007;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 178;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 32;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 127;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 337.
Fiscal year: 2008;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 184;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 32;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 127;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 343.
Total sites:
Fiscal year: 2004;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 2,064;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 1,082;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 1,840;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 164;
Total: 5,150.
Fiscal year: 2005;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 2,066;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 1,113;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 1,840;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 164;
Total: 5,183.
Fiscal year: 2006;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 2,184;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 1,154;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 1,881;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 164;
Total: 5,383.
Fiscal year: 2007;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 2,154;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 1,161;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 1,936;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 164;
Total: 5,415.
Fiscal year: 2008;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 2,183;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 1,162;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 1,936;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 164;
Total: 5,445.
IRP high risk[B]:
Fiscal year: 2004;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 75;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 71;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 125;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 4;
Total: 275.
Fiscal year: 2005;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 59;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 62;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 115;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 3;
Total: 239.
Fiscal year: 2006;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 71;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 67;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 111;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 2;
Total: 251.
Fiscal year: 2007;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 65;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 69;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 116;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 2;
Total: 252.
Fiscal year: 2008;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 67;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 62;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 103;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 2;
Total: 234.
MMRP high risk[B,C]:
Fiscal year: 2004;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 34;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 0;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 0;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 34.
Fiscal year: 2005;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 33;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 0;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 0;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 33.
Fiscal year: 2006;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 50;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 0;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 0;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 0;
Total: 50.
Fiscal year: 2007;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: [Empty];
Total: [Empty].
Fiscal year: 2008;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: [Empty];
Total: [Empty].
Total high-risk sites[C]:
Fiscal year: 2004;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 109;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 71;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 125;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 4;
Total: 309.
Fiscal year: 2005;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 92;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 62;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 115;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 3;
Total: 272.
Fiscal year: 2006;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: 121;
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: 67;
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: 111;
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: 2;
Total: 301.
Fiscal year: 2007;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: [Empty];
Total: [Empty].
Fiscal year: 2008;
Number of sites: Military component: Army: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Navy: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Air Force: [Empty];
Number of sites: Military component: Defense Logistics Agency: [Empty];
Total: [Empty].
Source: GAO's analysis of DOD data.
[A] IRP numbers include Building Demolition and Debris Removal Program
sites.
[B] We defined risk categories as follows: IRP high risk sites are
those with a relative risk site evaluation risk level of "high" and
MMRP high risk sites are those with a risk assessment code of 1 or 2.
[C] The actual number of high-risk MMRP sites are incomplete after
fiscal year 2006 because DOD is transitioning to a new scoring system.
[End of table]
Challenges to DOD's Environmental Cleanup Efforts:
Our past work has also identified a number of challenges to DOD's
efforts in undertaking environmental cleanup activities at defense
sites, including BRAC sites. For example, we have reported the
following:
* DOD's preliminary cost estimates for environmental cleanup at
specific sites may not reflect the full cost of cleanup. That is,
costs are generally expected to increase as more information becomes
known about the extent of the cleanup needed at a site to make it safe
enough to be reused by others. We reported in 2007 that our experience
with prior BRAC rounds had shown that cost estimates tend to increase
significantly once more detailed studies and investigations are
completed.[Footnote 18]
* Environmental cleanup issues are unique to each site. However, we
have reported that three key factors can lead to delays in the cleanup
and transfer of sites. These factors are (1) technological constraints
that limit DOD's ability to accurately identify, detect, and clean up
unexploded ordnance from a particular site, (2) prolonged negotiations
between environmental regulators and DOD about the extent to which
DOD's actions are in compliance with environmental regulations and
laws, and (3) the discovery of previously undetected environmental
contamination that can result in the need for further cleanup, cost
increases, and delays in property transfer.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, while the data indicate that DOD has made
progress in cleaning up its contaminated sites, they also show that a
significant amount of work remains to be done. Given the large number
of sites that DOD must clean up, we recognize that it faces a
significant challenge. Addressing this challenge, however, is critical
because environmental cleanup has historically been a key impediment
to the expeditious transfer of unneeded property to other federal and
nonfederal parties who can put the property to new uses.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy
to respond to any questions that you or Members of the Subcommittee
may have.
GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public
Affairs may be found on the last page of this statement. For further
information about this testimony, please contact Anu Mittal at (202)
512-3841 or mittala@gao.gov or John B. Stephenson at (202) 512-3841 or
stephensonj@gao.gov. Contributors to this testimony include Elizabeth
Beardsley, Antoinette Capaccio, Vincent Price, and John Smith.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] FUDS are located on properties that were under the jurisdiction of
the DOD and owned or controlled by, leased to, or otherwise possessed
by the United States prior to October 17, 1986, but have since been
transferred to states, local governments, federal entities, and
private parties.
[2] To enable DOD to close unneeded bases and realign others, Congress
enacted legislation that instituted five separate BRAC rounds in 1988,
1991, 1993, 1995, and 2005. Independent commissions established for
each BRAC round made specific recommendations to the Senate and House
Committees on Armed Services for the 1988 round and, thereafter, to
the President, who in turn, sent the commissions' recommendations and
his approval to Congress.
[3] GAO, Formerly Used Defense Sites: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Needs to Improve Its Process for Reviewing Completed Cleanup Remedies
to Ensure Continued Protection, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-46] (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 29,
2009).
[4] GAO, Military Base Closures: Opportunities Exist to Improve
Environmental Cleanup Cost Reporting and to Expedite Transfer of
Unneeded Property, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-166]
(Washington, D.C.: Jan. 30, 2007).
[5] DOD defines a "'major base closure" as one where plant replacement
value exceeds $100 million. DOD defines "plant replacement value" as
the cost to replace an existing facility with a facility of the same
size at the same location, using today's building standards. DOD
defines a "major base realignment" as one with a net loss of 400 or
more military and civilian personnel.
[6] Pub. L. No. 101-510, § 2904 (1990).
[7] GAO, Military Base Closures: Progress in Completing Actions from
Prior Realignments and Closures, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-02-433] (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 5,
2002).
[8] CERCLA, Pub. L. 96-510 (1980), codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. §
9601-9630 (2010).
[9] Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), Pub. L. No.
99-499 § 120(a) (1986).
[10] Exec. Order 12,580 § 2 (1987). See also 10 U.S.C. § 2701 (2010).
[11] Pub. L. No. 99-499, § 211.
[12] DERP also includes the Building Demolition and Debris Removal
program, which involves the demolition and removal of unsafe buildings
and structures from defense sites.
[13] The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997, Pub.
L. No. 104-201 § 334 (1996).
[14] DOD Financial Management Regulation 7000.14-R, October 2008.
[15] The most recent set of such goals was established by the John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, Pub.
L. No. 109-364 § 313, 120 Stat. 2083, 2138 (2006).
[16] As noted previously, the active, BRAC, and FUDS cleanup
activities are funded from distinct appropriations.
[17] All dollar amounts in this section reflect installation project
funding allocated to individual sites for cleanup under the IRP, MMRP
and building demolition and debris removal, and do not include program
management and other support costs.
[18] GAO, Military Base Closures: Opportunities Exist to Improve
Environmental Cleanup Cost Reporting and to Expedite Transfer of
Unneeded Property, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-166]
(Washington, D.C. : Jan. 30, 2007)
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "E-mail Updates."
Order by Phone:
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO‘s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO‘s Web site,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm].
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional
information.
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548: