Superfund

Mining and smelting activities over the last century have contaminated land and water in western Montana's Clark Fork River Basin with hazardous wastes. Because these wastes include known or suspected carcinogens, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established four Superfund sites in the river basin. GAO found that while cleanup work has been under way at these sites since 1984, little progress has been made; only two of the sites' 23 contaminated areas have been completely cleaned up. The Clark Fork master plan, developed in 1988 by EPA and the Montana health department to coordinate cleanup work, did not provide a workable sequencing of cleanup activities or realistic milestones. A revised plan addresses limitations of the 1988 plan, but EPA needs to improve its strategy for monitoring the plan's implementation. EPA has tried to address problems at Clark Fork and other sites across the country, such as lack of public participation in cleanup planning, but further cleanup delays are likely because of disagreements over soil cleanup levels, EPA's model provisions for cleanup agreements, and public concerns over cleanups for selected activities. EPA also has been slow to issue letters demanding reimbursement from responsible parties for Clark Fork cleanup costs partly because of staffing shortages. As a result, GAO estimates that the government has lost as much as $750,000 in interest income. GAO believes that EPA may find it cost beneficial to request more staff resources.

GAO found that: (1) only 2 of the 4 sites' 23 operable units have been cleaned up completely, and studies at 3 sites did not result in appropriate cleanup remedies; (2) EPA and a private firm spent $54 million on cleanup activities, but they only spent $24 million on cleanup studies; (3) the 1988 Clark Fork master plan to coordinate cleanup work did not provide workable sequencing of cleanup activities, but the 1990 plan addressed those limitations; (4) further cleanup delays are likely because of disagreements over soil cleanup levels, EPA model provisions for cleanup agreements, and public concerns over cleanups for selected units; and (5) staffing shortages, poor cost documentation, and an inefficient accounting system have hampered EPA cost identification activities and prevented it from taking timely cost recovery action on the $33 million it spent at the sites.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: Team: Phone: