Nuclear Waste
Plans for Addressing Most Buried Transuranic Wastes Are Not Final, and Preliminary Cost Estimates Will Likely Increase Gao ID: GAO-07-761 June 22, 2007Since the 1940s, the development of nuclear weapons technologies has generated transuranic wastes--materials contaminated by certain man-made radioactive elements. These wastes can remain dangerous for thousands of years. Until 1970, the Department of Energy's (DOE) predecessors buried these wastes in shallow pits and trenches. Today, state officials and communities near DOE's major disposal sites have expressed concerns that such wastes might contaminate important ground and surface water resources. GAO was asked to (1) determine the legal requirements and policies affecting DOE's efforts to address transuranic wastes buried before 1970, (2) determine what DOE is doing to address sites where these transuranic wastes are buried, and (3) assess the reliability of DOE's estimated costs to address these sites. We met with federal and state officials at five DOE sites containing buried transuranic wastes, reviewed environmental laws and guidance, and obtained buried waste cleanup cost estimates from each site. In commenting on this report, DOE generally agreed with our findings, and provided some clarifying comments.
Cleanup agreements with federal and state agencies require DOE to investigate and clean up the five major DOE sites where transuranic and other hazardous wastes were buried. While DOE has long considered pre-1970s buried wastes permanently disposed, in 1989, the sites where most of these wastes are buried were listed as "Superfund" sites subject to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). CERCLA requires that DOE determine the nature and extent of contamination at each waste site and determine what cleanup action, if any, is needed to protect human health and the environment. All five disposal sites are scheduled to have cleanup completed by 2025. DOE is addressing the transuranic wastes buried at two sites, but it is still investigating cleanup options at the other three locations. At Oak Ridge and Savannah River, DOE is leaving the transuranic wastes in place under an earthen cap designed to prevent the wastes from migrating and taking steps to prevent animal and human access to the sites. In contrast, DOE is still investigating cleanup options at the Idaho National Laboratory, the Hanford Site, and the Los Alamos National Laboratory--where about 90 percent of DOE's transuranic wastes are buried. DOE has begun to remove a small amount of waste at the Idaho and Hanford sites, but how much buried transuranic wastes eventually will be removed or treated in place at these sites is currently undetermined. DOE's preliminary estimate of the cost to address the five waste sites where transuranic wastes are buried is about $1.6 billion in 2006 dollars, but the estimate is likely to increase for several reasons. For example, the estimates reflect the costs of leaving most waste under earthen barriers--typically the least expensive approach. If DOE is required to retrieve substantial portions of these wastes, costs would increase dramatically. In addition, the estimates exclude unknown costs, such as the cost of disposing wastes off-site, if necessary. For example, DOE's lifecycle cost estimate to remove transuranic wastes buried near the Columbia River at the Hanford site could triple once options and costs for disposal are fully evaluated. As DOE further evaluates the risks, benefits, and costs of cleanup options, its policies require it to improve the reliability of cost estimates. Thus, GAO is not making recommendations at this time.
GAO-07-761, Nuclear Waste: Plans for Addressing Most Buried Transuranic Wastes Are Not Final, and Preliminary Cost Estimates Will Likely Increase
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-07-761
entitled 'Nuclear Waste: Plans for Addressing Most Buried Transuranic
Wastes Are Not Final, and Preliminary Cost Estimates Will Likely
Increase' which was released on June 22, 2007.
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.
Report to the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development and Related
Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
June 2007:
Nuclear Waste:
Plans for Addressing Most Buried Transuranic Wastes Are Not Final, and
Preliminary Cost Estimates Will Likely Increase:
GAO-07-761:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-07-761, a report to the Subcommittee on Energy and
Water Development, Committee on Appropriations, House of
Representatives
Why GAO Did This Study:
Since the 1940s, the development of nuclear weapons technologies has
generated transuranic wastes”materials contaminated by certain man-made
radioactive elements. These wastes can remain dangerous for thousands
of years. Until 1970, the Department of Energy‘s (DOE) predecessors
buried these wastes in shallow pits and trenches. Today, state
officials and communities near DOE‘s major disposal sites have
expressed concerns that such wastes might contaminate important ground
and surface water resources.
GAO was asked to (1) determine the legal requirements and policies
affecting DOE‘s efforts to address transuranic wastes buried before
1970, (2) determine what DOE is doing to address sites where these
transuranic wastes are buried, and (3) assess the reliability of DOE‘s
estimated costs to address these sites.
We met with federal and state officials at five DOE sites containing
buried transuranic wastes, reviewed environmental laws and guidance,
and obtained buried waste cleanup cost estimates from each site.
In commenting on this report, DOE generally agreed with our findings,
and provided some clarifying comments.
What GAO Found:
Cleanup agreements with federal and state agencies require DOE to
investigate and clean up the five major DOE sites where transuranic and
other hazardous wastes were buried. While DOE has long considered pre-
1970s buried wastes permanently disposed, in 1989, the sites where most
of these wastes are buried were listed as ’Superfund“ sites subject to
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). CERCLA requires that DOE determine the nature and
extent of contamination at each waste site and determine what cleanup
action, if any, is needed to protect human health and the environment.
All five disposal sites are scheduled to have cleanup completed by
2025.
DOE is addressing the transuranic wastes buried at two sites, but it is
still investigating cleanup options at the other three locations. At
Oak Ridge and Savannah River, DOE is leaving the transuranic wastes in
place under an earthen cap designed to prevent the wastes from
migrating and taking steps to prevent animal and human access to the
sites. In contrast, DOE is still investigating cleanup options at the
Idaho National Laboratory, the Hanford Site, and the Los Alamos
National Laboratory––where about 90 percent of DOE‘s transuranic wastes
are buried. DOE has begun to remove a small amount of waste at the
Idaho and Hanford sites, but how much buried transuranic wastes
eventually will be removed or treated in place at these sites is
currently undetermined.
DOE‘s preliminary estimate of the cost to address the five waste sites
where transuranic wastes are buried is about $1.6 billion in 2006
dollars, but the estimate is likely to increase for several reasons.
For example, the estimates reflect the costs of leaving most waste
under earthen barriers”typically the least expensive approach. If DOE
is required to retrieve substantial portions of these wastes, costs
would increase dramatically. In addition, the estimates exclude unknown
costs, such as the cost of disposing wastes off-site, if necessary. For
example, DOE‘s lifecycle cost estimate to remove transuranic wastes
buried near the Columbia River at the Hanford site could triple once
options and costs for disposal are fully evaluated. As DOE further
evaluates the risks, benefits, and costs of cleanup options, its
policies require it to improve the reliability of cost estimates. Thus,
GAO is not making recommendations at this time.
What GAO Recommends:
GAO is not making recommendations at this time.
[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-761].
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact James Cosgrove, 202-512-
3841 or cosgrovej@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
Cleanup Agreements Require DOE to Address Sites Where Transuranic
Wastes Are Buried:
DOE Is Containing Buried Transuranic Wastes in Place at Two Sites but
Is Still Developing Cleanup Plans at the Largest Waste Sites:
Estimated Costs to Address Waste Disposal Areas in Which Transuranic
Wastes Are Buried Will Likely Increase:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Energy:
Appendix III: Contact Information and Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Interagency Agreement Schedule for Addressing DOE Sites
Containing Buried Transuranic Wastes:
Table 2: Summary of DOE Estimated Lifecycle Costs to Address Disposal
Areas Containing Buried Transuranic and Other Hazardous Wastes:
Figures:
Figure 1: Typical Disposal of Transuranic and Other Wastes in Unlined
Trench at the Hanford Site Prior to 1970:
Figure 2. Example of an Engineered Barrier Constructed over a Burial
Ground Containing Radioactive or Hazardous Wastes:
Figure 3: Aerial View of an Engineered Barrier under Construction at
Oak Ridge:
Abbreviations:
CERCLA: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980, as amended:
DOE: Department of Energy:
EPA: Environmental Protection Agency:
RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended:
WIPP: Waste Isolation Pilot Plant:
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
June 22, 2007:
The Honorable Peter J. Visclosky:
Chairman:
The Honorable David L. Hobson:
Ranking Minority Member:
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies:
Committee on Appropriations:
House of Representatives:
Since the 1940s, the Department of Energy (DOE) and its predecessors
have operated a nationwide complex of facilities used to research,
design, and manufacture nuclear weapons and related technologies. While
these activities are important for national defense, they have left a
legacy of radioactive and other hazardous wastes that have contaminated
or could contaminate the environment. Among them is a large quantity of
transuranic wastes--typically, discarded rags, tools, equipment, soils,
or other solid materials that have been contaminated by man-made
radioactive elements, such as plutonium or americium. Transuranic
wastes remain radioactive for extremely long periods--hundreds of
thousands of years, in some cases. Inhaling or ingesting even miniscule
quantities of some transuranic elements can cause cancer in humans.
According to DOE, the department has buried or stored approximately
238,000 cubic meters of transuranic wastes (equal to the volume of
about 100 Olympic-sized swimming pools) at its sites. About 111,000
cubic meters of these wastes were generated mostly after 1970, and then
stored at various locations with the bulk of these wastes intended for
transfer to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)--a deep geologic
repository in New Mexico designed for permanent disposal of transuranic
wastes.[Footnote 1] The other 127,000 cubic meters of transuranic
wastes were disposed of, generally before 1970, when DOE buried these
wastes in shallow pits and trenches, often with other radioactive and
hazardous wastes.[Footnote 2] DOE estimates that most of these
transuranic wastes are buried at its Hanford Site in Washington state
and the Idaho National Laboratory, while almost all of the remaining
transuranic wastes are buried at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in
New Mexico, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, and the
Savannah River Site in South Carolina.
In addition to the threats that buried transuranic wastes may pose, the
other radioactive and hazardous wastes buried with them may pose
additional threats. Some of these wastes emit skin-penetrating
radiation and cannot be directly handled by humans. Other wastes, such
as organic solvents and toxic metals, are volatile. In some cases,
these wastes can migrate readily through soil, especially if exposed to
water, and may contaminate surface waters and groundwater.
Given the potential long-term threat that buried transuranic and other
radioactive and hazardous wastes may pose to human health and the
environment, including their potential to contaminate water resources,
state environmental protection officials and communities adjacent to
these disposal sites have expressed concerns about these wastes. You
asked us to (1) determine the legal requirements and policies governing
DOE's efforts to address transuranic wastes buried before 1970, (2)
determine what DOE is doing to address sites where these transuranic
wastes are buried, and (3) assess the reliability of DOE's estimated
costs to address these sites.
To conduct our work, we visited the five DOE sites that contain most of
DOE's transuranic wastes buried before 1970. We met with local DOE
officials at these five largest burial sites, which include the Hanford
Site, the Idaho National Laboratory, the Los Alamos National
Laboratory, the Savannah River Site, and the Oak Ridge National
Laboratory. To determine the legal requirements and policies governing
DOE's efforts to address its buried transuranic wastes, we reviewed
federal environmental laws and regulations; DOE guidance concerning
hazardous and radioactive wastes; Federal Facility Agreements and
Orders; a May 2006 federal district court decision; and internal DOE,
federal, and private studies on the storage and disposition of
transuranic wastes. To better understand these laws, regulations,
agreements, and policies we interviewed state environmental protection
officials and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials that
oversee each of the buried waste locations. To determine what DOE is
doing to address sites where transuranic wastes are buried, we reviewed
waste cleanup planning documents that DOE prepared for these sites. In
this context, we also interviewed scientific experts, DOE site project
managers, state environmental regulatory officials, and EPA officials
providing management and oversight at buried waste locations. Finally,
to assess the reliability of DOE's estimates of the cost of addressing
sites where transuranic wastes are buried, we analyzed each DOE field
location's fiscal year 2006 estimates for projects that included
cleaning up buried transuranic wastes. A more detailed description of
our scope and methodology is presented in appendix I. We performed our
work between May 2006 and May 2007 in accordance with generally
accepted government auditing standards.
Results in Brief:
Cleanup agreements entered into with federal and state environmental
agencies require DOE to investigate and, as necessary, clean up sites
where radioactive and other hazardous wastes, including transuranic
wastes, were buried from the 1940s through 1970s. While DOE considered
transuranic wastes buried prior to 1970 to have been permanently
disposed of, the sites where most of these wastes are buried have since
become subject to the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (CERCLA), also
known as "Superfund," and other environmental laws. Under CERCLA, EPA
evaluates waste sites for possible inclusion on the National Priorities
List--EPA's list of the nation's most serious contaminated sites that
contain radioactive or other hazardous substances. In 1989, EPA placed
the sites where DOE buried most of its transuranic wastes on the
National Priorities List (Hanford Site, Idaho National Laboratory, Oak
Ridge National Laboratory, and the Savannah River Site). CERCLA
requires DOE to determine the nature and extent of contamination at
each of these sites; identify options for addressing the wastes and the
relative risks, effectiveness, and costs of each option; and to enter
into a cleanup agreement with EPA for the expeditious completion of all
necessary cleanup actions. DOE has entered into agreements with EPA and
the affected states for carrying out cleanup activities at these four
sites. In addition, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, which is not
listed on the National Priorities List, is being cleaned up in
accordance with similar agreements with New Mexico under other
environmental laws. The agreements for the five sites set milestones by
which DOE is expected to complete cleanups at the sites. Of the five
sites, the latest scheduled completion date is for the Idaho National
Laboratory in 2025.
DOE has made cleanup decisions and is addressing the transuranic wastes
buried at Oak Ridge and Savannah River, but it is still investigating
cleanup options at the other three locations. At Oak Ridge and Savannah
River, where about 10 percent of DOE's transuranic wastes are buried,
DOE is leaving the transuranic wastes in place under a man-made barrier
constructed of layered vegetation, soil, clay, and synthetic liners
designed to prevent water from reaching the wastes and causing them to
migrate through the soil. DOE is also implementing controls, such as
perimeter fencing, to prevent animal intrusion and control human access
to the burial sites. DOE officials, in conjunction with the federal and
state environmental agencies, decided to contain the buried wastes in
place after concluding that it would be as safe or safer for workers
and the environment and less costly than removing the wastes from the
ground. Federal and state environmental agencies agreed with DOE's
decisions. DOE finished constructing the barriers at Oak Ridge in
September 2006 and expects to complete the barrier at Savannah River by
summer 2007. In contrast, at the other three sites--the Idaho National
Laboratory, the Hanford Site, and the Los Alamos National Laboratory--
where about 90 percent of DOE's transuranic wastes are buried, DOE is
in varying stages of investigating cleanup options. A federal district
court ruled in May 2006 that a 1995 agreement between DOE and Idaho
requires DOE to remove all of the stored and buried transuranic wastes
at the Idaho site. DOE has appealed this ruling, and, as an interim
action, is removing a small amount of transuranic wastes from the site.
In the meantime, DOE is evaluating cleanup options for the site and
expects to select a cleanup approach by 2009. At Los Alamos and
Hanford, DOE is still in the early stages of investigating waste areas
and plans to evaluate cleanup options; a cleanup approach will be
decided for these sites by 2007 and 2013, respectively. At Hanford, DOE
has already agreed to remove a small amount of buried transuranic waste
that threatens the Columbia River. In general, state environmental
agencies have expressed concern that leaving the transuranic wastes in
place at the three sites, even with additional controls to limit
intrusion, may not adequately prevent the buried contaminants from
spreading to the environment in the long term. How much, if any, buried
transuranic wastes will eventually be removed from these sites is
undetermined, and final decisions are years away.
DOE's preliminary estimate of the cost to address the five waste sites
where transuranic wastes are buried is about $1.6 billion (in fiscal
year 2006 dollars), but this estimate will likely increase
substantially for two principal reasons. First, DOE's estimate reflects
the costs of leaving most of the waste in place under engineered
barriers, as DOE is doing at Savannah River and Oak Ridge. This is
typically the least expensive approach for addressing buried waste.
However, if DOE is required by EPA or state environmental agencies to
remove substantial portions of these wastes, costs are likely to
increase dramatically. For example, at Idaho, where DOE and the state
disagree over the extent to which DOE must remove buried transuranic
wastes, preliminary DOE cost estimate indicates that removing all of
the transuranic wastes would increase costs from about $1 billion to
about $8.2 billion. Second, DOE's estimate excludes unknown costs, such
as the cost of disposing wastes off-site, if necessary. For example,
some wastes scheduled for exhumation may not meet the waste acceptance
criteria established for on-site disposal facilities and may have to be
packaged and transported elsewhere, which would increase costs.
According to DOE's Inspector General, the $113 million estimate to
remove transuranic wastes buried near the Columbia River at Hanford
could triple once options and costs for disposal are fully evaluated.
As DOE moves these projects forward and further evaluates the risks,
benefits, and costs of various cleanup options, its project management
policies require it to revise these cost estimates to improve their
reliability. Thus, we are not making recommendations at this time.
We provided a draft of this report to DOE for its review and comment.
Overall, DOE generally agreed with our findings. However, with regard
to the volume of transuranic wastes intended for disposal at WIPP, DOE
stated that it regularly adjusts its forecasts and does not currently
project that waste volumes will exceed WIPP capacity. While we agree
that DOE's current projections do not indicate WIPP capacity will fall
short of future requirements, cleanup decisions are still pending at
the Hanford Site and the Idaho National Laboratory, which together
comprise the bulk of DOE's total inventory of buried transuranic
wastes. If substantial portions of the transuranic wastes at these
sites must be exhumed and disposed of off-site, WIPP's authorized
capacity may be insufficient. DOE also provided technical
clarifications, which we have incorporated in this report as
appropriate.
Background:
DOE's current and former nuclear weapons complex includes dozens of
sites nationwide containing nuclear reactors, chemical processing
buildings, plants, laboratories, and maintenance facilities that
manufactured thousands of nuclear warheads and together conducted more
than one thousand nuclear explosion tests. The environmental legacy of
nuclear weapons production includes contaminated buildings, soils,
water resources, and large volumes of radioactive and hazardous wastes
that require treatment, stabilization to prevent migration, and
disposal. DOE estimated in 2006, that the future cost to clean up,
dispose, and provide long-term oversight of all wastes will be more
than $230 billion over the next 75 years.
Among the sites requiring environmental cleanup are the five sites
addressed in this report. The Hanford Site is located on the arid east
side of Washington state near Richland and adjacent to the Columbia
River. The site was established to produce plutonium for nuclear
weapons during World War II and, according to DOE, subsequently
produced the majority of the nation's plutonium during the Cold War.
The Idaho National Laboratory, located near Idaho Falls in the
southeastern Idaho desert, was established in 1949 as the National
Reactor Testing Station and was the site of the largest concentration
of nuclear reactors--52--in the world. Los Alamos National Laboratory,
located in a mountainous area of northern New Mexico, was established
in 1943 and played a central role in researching the advanced
technologies required for nuclear weapons manufacture. It is where the
first atomic bomb was assembled. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory near
Knoxville, Tenn., was established in 1943 to pilot the processing of
uranium during World War II. The Savannah River Site, near Aiken, S.C.,
was built in the 1950s to produce basic materials needed in nuclear
weapons manufacture, such as tritium and plutonium.
DOE's Office of Environmental Management is responsible for cleaning up
contamination left behind at these sites after decades of nuclear
production and research. Environmental management officials at DOE
field sites plan and oversee the cleanup activities at those sites, but
the work itself is carried out primarily by private firms contracted by
DOE. Officials from EPA, as well as environmental agency officials from
the states in which DOE sites are located, enforce federal and state
environmental laws and oversee and advise DOE on its cleanup efforts.
Transuranic elements, which have an atomic weight greater than uranium,
are man-made radioactive elements produced in nuclear reactors.
Transuranic wastes are created when materials such as clothing and
tools come into contact with plutonium and other transuranic elements
during processing activities and cannot be reused for other purposes.
They were first generated during operations to produce and recover
plutonium for nuclear weapons manufacture and are still being produced
in small quantities at laboratories where nuclear research continues
today. Federal law currently defines transuranic waste as waste
containing more than 100 nanocuries of alpha-emitting transuranic
elements (radiation) per gram and with half-lives greater than 20 years
with certain exceptions.[Footnote 3] A half-life is the amount of time
required for an element to decay by half, and nanocuries are a measure
of radioactivity. Alpha-emitting radiation cannot pass through objects,
including human skin, but is extremely dangerous if inhaled or
ingested. Some buried wastes contaminated with transuranic elements may
not meet the current legal definition of transuranic wastes. For ease
of discussion in this report, however, we refer to these wastes as
buried transuranic wastes.
Cleanup Agreements Require DOE to Address Sites Where Transuranic
Wastes Are Buried:
The cleanup agreements DOE entered into with federal and state
environmental agencies require DOE to investigate and take action as
necessary to clean up sites where transuranic and other wastes were
buried. The legal and regulatory framework governing management and
disposal of transuranic wastes has changed significantly over the past
50 years, particularly in 1970. Before 1970, there was no separate
category for what is now defined as transuranic waste. Consequently,
the federal government managed this waste as low-level radioactive
waste, which it buried along with hazardous wastes in unlined, shallow
pits and trenches, as shown in figure 1.
Figure 1: Typical Disposal of Transuranic and Other Wastes in Unlined
Trench at the Hanford Site Prior to 1970:
[See PDF for image]
Source: DOE.
[End of figure]
In 1970, in response to concerns that transuranic elements remain
radioactive for an extremely long time and scientific research
recommending deep geologic disposal for this waste, the Atomic Energy
Commission--a DOE predecessor--directed sites that generated
transuranic wastes to begin segregating them from other wastes and
storing them in retrievable packages for an interim period of 20 years,
pending disposal in a repository.[Footnote 4] In late 1979, Congress
authorized DOE to develop a deep geologic repository in New Mexico to
permanently dispose of transuranic wastes, including these stored
transuranic wastes.[Footnote 5] In October 1992, Congress gave DOE
management responsibility for the land, and gave EPA substantial
responsibility for regulating many of DOE's activities at the
repository.[Footnote 6] This repository, known as the Waste Isolation
Pilot Plant (WIPP), began operating in the late 1990s and, in 1999,
received its first shipment of transuranic wastes generated after the
1970 directive to segregate and store such wastes.
The Atomic Energy Commission's 1970 directive did not apply to
transuranic wastes buried prior to 1970, and DOE considered these
wastes permanently disposed. However, the sites where these wastes are
buried have since become subject to CERCLA and other environmental
laws. In particular, section 120 of CERCLA[Footnote 7] requires EPA to
evaluate federal waste sites for possible inclusion on the National
Priorities List. In 1989, EPA included on this list, the waste sites
that contain most of DOE's buried transuranic wastes--Hanford, Idaho,
Oak Ridge, and Savannah River.[Footnote 8] With this designation,
CERCLA requires DOE to evaluate the nature and extent of contamination
at these sites and determine what cleanup actions, if any, are
necessary to protect human health and the environment. The buried
transuranic waste sites at Los Alamos were evaluated but were not
placed on the list. Cleanup of Los Alamos is being carried out under
other authorities. At Los Alamos, the cleanup is being conducted under
agreements with New Mexico--implementing the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976, as amended (RCRA) and state law--and under DOE's
Atomic Energy Act authority. The provisions of the Los Alamos cleanup
agreements are similar to those under CERCLA requirements, including a
schedule for conducting the cleanup. Los Alamos has multiple waste
sites that contain buried transuranic wastes, and DOE's agreements with
the state of New Mexico address each waste area separately.
To carry out the cleanup of its National Priorities List sites under
CERLCA, DOE must follow a process that includes extensive consultation
between DOE, EPA, and state environmental agencies, as well as
opportunities for public participation, to reach a decision on how DOE
should clean up the respective site. The process begins with DOE
consulting EPA and state environmental agencies and investigating the
nature and extent of contamination at each site and undertaking a
feasibility study to identify and evaluate possible approaches for
cleaning up each site. After evaluating the approaches, DOE selects a
"preferred alternative" that meets CERCLA requirements and presents,
for public comment, a proposed plan explaining its preferred approach
for cleaning up the wastes. DOE considers the public's comments and
consults with EPA and the state environmental agency to determine a
cleanup approach.
Once the parties have reached agreement, the approach and the rationale
for selecting it are published in a legally binding Record of Decision.
In addition, DOE must enter into an interagency agreement with EPA that
includes, among other things, a schedule for completing cleanup of the
site. The environmental agency in the affected state is also a party to
the agreements for Hanford, Idaho, Oak Ridge, and Savannah River. If
the selected cleanup approach will involve leaving hazardous substances
at the site, DOE must monitor the effectiveness of the approach and
review the action every 5 years to determine whether any additional
actions are necessary to protect human health and the
environment.[Footnote 9] The provisions of the agreements, including
the milestones, are legally enforceable and can be revised, as
necessary, to incorporate new information and address changing
conditions. As shown in table 1, DOE is currently scheduled to complete
cleanup actions at all five sites by 2025.
Table 1: Interagency Agreement Schedule for Addressing DOE Sites
Containing Buried Transuranic Wastes:
Oak Ridge National Laboratory[A];
Estimated volume of buried transuranic waste (in cubic meters): 7,450;
Site investigation completed: 1997;
Alternatives proposed: 1998;
Remedy selected: 2000;
Remedial action completed: 2006.
Savannah River Site[A];
Estimated volume of buried transuranic waste (in cubic meters): 4,530;
Site investigation completed: 1994;
Alternatives proposed: 2001;
Remedy selected: 2002;
Remedial action completed: 2008.
Los Alamos National Laboratory[B];
Estimated volume of buried transuranic waste (in cubic meters): 11,800;
Site investigation completed: 2006;
Alternatives proposed: 2007;
Remedy selected: 2007;
Remedial action completed: 2015.
Hanford Site;
Estimated volume of buried transuranic waste (in cubic meters): 66,700;
Site investigation completed: 2011;
Alternatives proposed: 2011;
Remedy selected: 2013;
Remedial action completed: 2024.
Idaho National Laboratory;
Estimated volume of buried transuranic waste (in cubic meters): 36,800;
Site investigation completed: 2006;
Alternatives proposed: 2007;
Remedy selected: 2008;
Remedial action completed: 2025.
Source: Data provided by DOE.
[A] For Oak Ridge and Savannah River, the dates for completing site
investigation, proposing alternatives, selecting a remedy and
completing remediation are actual, rather than scheduled. In addition,
the remedy implemented at Oak Ridge is considered interim, until a
final cleanup decision--expected in 2015--is reached. The final cleanup
decision could involve additional remedial action to address
transuranic wastes buried there.
[B] The dates in the table represent the latest date by which Los
Alamos is scheduled to complete cleanup of the final buried transuranic
waste site, Material Disposal Area G.
[End of table]
DOE Is Containing Buried Transuranic Wastes in Place at Two Sites but
Is Still Developing Cleanup Plans at the Largest Waste Sites:
DOE has made cleanup decisions and is addressing transuranic wastes at
Oak Ridge and Savannah River, but the department is still investigating
cleanup options at the other three locations where most of DOE's
transuranic wastes are buried. DOE plans to leave transuranic wastes
buried at Oak Ridge and Savannah River in place under an engineered
barrier and take additional measures to prevent intrusions that could
expose humans and the environment to the buried contaminants. In
contrast, DOE is still evaluating cleanup options at the Idaho National
Laboratory, Hanford Site and Los Alamos National Laboratory, where
about 90 percent of its buried transuranic wastes are located. The
extent to which DOE will be required to retrieve buried wastes or will
be allowed to manage these wastes in place is currently unknown, and
cleanup decisions for the majority of these wastes are several years
away. However, DOE has agreed to retrieve some of the wastes buried at
Hanford and Idaho, because the wastes may threaten nearby surface
waters and groundwater.
Cleanup Agreements at Oak Ridge and Savannah River Call for Containing
Buried Transuranic Wastes in Place:
In accordance with CERCLA's requirements, DOE evaluated a number of
approaches for addressing transuranic wastes buried at Oak Ridge and
Savannah River. At both sites, DOE had originally disposed of the
wastes in near-surface burial pits and trenches, often with other
radioactive or hazardous wastes, including cesium, strontium, and
volatile organic compounds. The two sites contain about 10 percent of
the estimated 127,000 cubic meters of transuranic wastes buried across
the five DOE sites. DOE officials at both sites considered several
cleanup options, ranging from managing the wastes in place to removing
them from the ground and disposing of any exhumed transuranic wastes at
WIPP.
DOE, EPA, and state environmental agencies at both sites agreed that
DOE should manage the buried wastes in place, because doing so would be
equally or more protective of human health and the environment, and
less costly than removing the wastes. Because DOE lacked adequate
information on the specific location, condition, or concentration of
the wastes in the burial sites, DOE and environmental agency officials
said they were concerned that workers attempting to remove buried
wastes would expose themselves to harmful contaminants or release
contaminants into the environment. DOE and environmental agency
officials told us that without adequate information on the location,
condition or concentration of the wastes, efforts to mitigate the risks
associated with retrieving the wastes would have been costly, requiring
specialized enclosures for the waste areas, protective suits for
workers, frequent rotation of workers to minimize their potential
exposure, or other measures. According to these officials, attempts to
determine the specific locations and other characteristics of the
buried contaminants would likely expose workers and the environment to
these same risks, because workers would be required to dig into the
burial grounds in order to sample buried wastes. Furthermore, the
officials were concerned that sampling buried wastes would not yield
reliable information.
As a result, DOE, EPA, and state environmental agencies at the two
sites agreed that DOE should manage the wastes in place by constructing
engineered barriers over the top of the burial grounds and implementing
additional controls to limit access to the burial grounds and help
ensure the barriers' effectiveness. The barriers' overall purpose is to
prevent rainwater, animals, or other intrusions from entering the
burial ground and potentially causing wastes to migrate into the air,
groundwater, or nearby surface waters. Barriers are generally composed
of multiple layers of earthen and synthetic materials (see fig. 2),
depending on the site-specific conditions. Surface vegetation and soil
function to absorb moisture, promote evaporation, and prevent water
from filtering down to the wastes beneath the barrier. A diversion
ditch carries surface water away from the waste site. Layers of rock,
clay, and synthetic fabrics redirect moisture away from the buried
wastes--and protect the wastes from burrowing animals.
Figure 2: Figure 2. Example of an Engineered Barrier Constructed over a
Burial Ground Containing Radioactive or Hazardous Wastes:
[See PDF for image]
Source: DOE.
Note: This figure depicts a barrier intended to remediate a waste site
in a wet climate. Barriers constructed at arid sites may differ.
[End of figure]
DOE finished constructing the engineered barriers at Oak Ridge in
September 2006 and expects to complete construction at Savannah River
by summer 2007 (see fig. 3). The Oak Ridge barriers are considered an
interim measure under CERCLA, in part because DOE and the state are
still assessing the conditions under which long-lived radioactive
wastes, including transuranic wastes, should be permanently disposed of
in-place. DOE officials at Oak Ridge said they expect a final cleanup
decision by 2015, at which time additional remedial actions to address
the buried transuranic wastes could be required.
In addition to the barriers, DOE plans to establish physical and long-
term administrative controls at the two sites aimed at limiting access
to areas where buried wastes were left in place. For example, DOE plans
to install perimeter fencing and gates at both sites and restrict
activities to maintenance of the engineered barriers. DOE also plans to
prohibit certain types of land uses in these areas, such as residential
use. It will transfer land-use restrictions at Savannah River to any
future occupants, should the federal government decide to sell or lease
land that includes the burial grounds. Furthermore, DOE officials from
both sites will evaluate and repair the cap, as needed, and provide
physical controls or sampling of the groundwater or surface waters in
these areas for evidence of contamination. DOE conducts formal reviews
of the barriers and related controls every 5 years. If EPA determines
the measures are not fully effective, DOE may be required to take
further actions, including removing some or all of the buried wastes.
Figure 3: Aerial View of an Engineered Barrier under Construction at
Oak Ridge:
[See PDF for Image]
Source: DOE.
[End of figure]
DOE Is Still Developing Cleanup Plans at the Three Locations Where Most
Transuranic Wastes Are Buried, but Some Waste Removal Is Already Under
Way:
DOE is still evaluating cleanup options for most of the waste at the
three remaining sites--the Hanford Site, the Idaho National Laboratory,
and the Los Alamos National Laboratory--where about 90 percent of DOE's
transuranic wastes are buried.
Hanford Site:
The Hanford Site contains about 66,700 cubic meters of buried
transuranic wastes, or about 53 percent of DOE's total inventory of
such wastes. These wastes were primarily disposed of in trenches in a
272-acre area located in the central portion of the site and near the
Columbia River. DOE is in the early stages of site investigations to
determine the extent and type of contamination for most of its burial
sites, and according to DOE, the department is scheduled to evaluate
cleanup options and determine its preferred cleanup approach by 2013.
However, DOE officials said that about 1,100 of the estimated 66,700
cubic meters of buried transuranic wastes are located in another area
of the Hanford site closer to the Columbia River than other sites. In
2001, DOE agreed to remove the transuranic wastes buried in this area,
as part of an interim effort to mitigate a plume of tritium, a
radioactive (but not transuranic) contaminant that is migrating and
could contaminate the Columbia River. Cleanup is scheduled for
completion by 2012. Overall, although a cleanup decision for most of
Hanford's buried transuranic wastes is years away, EPA and Washington
state environmental officials have expressed concern that leaving much
of the buried transuranic and other hazardous wastes in place under
engineered barriers--even with additional controls to limit intrusion-
-may not provide adequate long-term protection for human health and the
environment, and some removal of these wastes may be necessary. Citizen
groups, such as the Hanford Advisory Council expressed similar concerns
regarding the risks of leaving long-lived radioactive wastes, such as
transuranic wastes, in place.
Idaho National Laboratory:
The Idaho National Laboratory contains about 36,800 cubic meters of
buried transuranic wastes, or about 29 percent of DOE's inventory of
such wastes. DOE officials at the Idaho site have prepared a draft
feasibility study identifying possible alternatives for cleaning up the
subsurface disposal area--a 97-acre area where transuranic, as well as
other radioactive and hazardous wastes, are buried--which the
department submitted to EPA and state environmental officials for
review in March 2007. The alternatives described in the draft study
ranged from containing most of the buried wastes in place under an
engineered barrier to retrieving some or all of the wastes and
permanently disposing of the transuranic portion at WIPP. DOE, EPA, and
the state environmental agency are scheduled to document the selected
cleanup approach in a record of decision by 2008. In 2005, DOE began
removing some transuranic and other wastes buried in a 3-acre section
of the 97-acre disposal area. DOE agreed to remove the wastes to
prevent the contaminants from migrating to the Snake River aquifer, a
drinking water source located about 580 feet below the disposal area.
Although a cleanup approach has not yet been determined for most of the
97-acre disposal area, DOE may be required to remove a significant
portion of the buried transuranic wastes that remain. DOE and Idaho
state officials have a long-standing disagreement regarding the amount
of transuranic wastes that DOE had agreed to remove from the Idaho site
under a 1995 settlement agreement with the state, in a case concerning
shipments of spent nuclear fuel into Idaho. The state of Idaho
subsequently sought to enforce terms of the agreement in court, and in
2006, a federal district court ruled that DOE is obligated under the
agreement to remove all the transuranic wastes at the Idaho National
Laboratory site.[Footnote 10] DOE has appealed the district court's
decision,[Footnote 11] but, in accordance with CERCLA requirements and
the cleanup agreement for the site, the department is continuing to
work with EPA and the state environmental agency to decide on a cleanup
approach for most of the wastes buried at the site.
Los Alamos National Laboratory:
Los Alamos National Laboratory has about 12,000 cubic meters of buried
transuranic wastes, or almost 10 percent of DOE's inventory of such
wastes. These wastes, which also include hazardous wastes, such as
volatile organic compounds, according to DOE, are in four disposal
areas that comprise about 85 acres of the Los Alamos site. DOE is
currently conducting site investigations to determine the extent and
nature of contamination at the disposal areas and plans to evaluate
cleanup options for those areas.
Unlike the other four DOE sites containing buried transuranic wastes,
Los Alamos was not included on the National Priorities List and,
therefore, transuranic wastes buried there are not being addressed
through the CERCLA process. Instead, cleanup of the buried waste sites
is being carried out under a combination of other federal and state
environmental laws and internal DOE orders.
Hazardous wastes buried at Los Alamos are being addressed through RCRA.
RCRA requires owners and operators of facilities that treat, store, or
dispose of hazardous wastes to obtain a permit from EPA, or an
authorized state, specifying how the facilities will safely manage that
waste. RCRA further authorizes EPA (or an authorized state) to require
facilities holding or seeking permits to clean up contamination at
those facilities. As provided under RCRA, EPA has authorized New Mexico
to carry out a RCRA hazardous waste program under state law in lieu of
the federal program. The cleanup process under the RCRA program is
generally similar to CERCLA, including an investigation of contaminated
areas and evaluation of cleanup options to select a cleanup approach.
DOE will address radioactive wastes, which have been commingled with
hazardous wastes at Los Alamos, under provisions of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended, which allows DOE to direct the process of
investigating and cleaning up radioactive contamination according to
its own regulations and internal directives. DOE has an agreement with
the state environmental agency that it would investigate its buried
waste sites containing transuranic wastes by 2006 and complete any
cleanup actions by 2015.[Footnote 12]
Estimated Costs to Address Waste Disposal Areas in Which Transuranic
Wastes Are Buried Will Likely Increase:
DOE's preliminary cost estimates for addressing the five waste sites
where transuranic and other hazardous wastes have been buried total
about $1.6 billion (in fiscal year 2006 dollars). Because these wastes
are commingled, the cost of addressing just the buried transuranic
wastes cannot be separately determined. DOE's estimates are based on
the costs of managing most of these wastes in place rather than
removing them for off-site disposal. However, DOE cautions these
estimates are preliminary and not entirely reliable because some wastes
may need to be retrieved and disposed of off-site, which would increase
costs substantially. In addition, some costs are not included because
they are not yet known. As DOE moves these projects forward to further
evaluate its various cleanup options, DOE's policies require it to
revise cost estimates, accordingly.
DOE Has Developed Cost Estimates to Address Geographic Areas Containing
Transuranic and Other Waste:
DOE has not separately estimated the costs to address only buried
transuranic wastes, but estimates that the costs to address the burial
grounds in which transuranic and other hazardous wastes have been
disposed are about $1.6 billion through 2035. The specific costs
associated with addressing only transuranic wastes cannot be determined
because DOE's Office of Environmental Management, which is charged with
cleaning up the disposal areas that include transuranic wastes, defines
cleanup projects by geographic waste disposal areas, rather than by
contaminant types. This is because many types of wastes and
contaminants were disposed together in a specific geographic area; and
in general, the Office of Environmental Management intends to address
various wastes buried in each geographic disposal area as a group. The
estimates to address the burial grounds reflect the "lifecycle" of each
project--that is the total estimated expenditures for all aspects of
managing a cleanup project from start to finish. These cost estimates
are reported in DOE's annual budget request to the Congress and
comprise a portion of DOE's environmental liabilities estimate included
in its annual financial statement.
As shown in table 2, DOE's estimated lifecycle baseline costs to
address the burial grounds containing transuranic wastes range from $36
million at the Savannah River Site--where officials are in the final
stages of completing construction of a cap to contain the wastes--to $1
billion at the Idaho National Laboratory, where DOE has begun to remove
selected wastes for disposal off-site, but is still evaluating options
to address most of the remaining buried waste.
Table 2: Summary of DOE Estimated Lifecycle Costs to Address Disposal
Areas Containing Buried Transuranic and Other Hazardous Wastes:
In constant 2006 dollars.
Location: Oak Ridge Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN;
Total waste disposal area containing transuranic wastes (in acres):
140;
Estimated total lifecycle cost to address disposal areas containing
transuranic wastes (in millions of dollars)[A]: $90.3[B];
Remedy assumed by DOE for cost estimation purposes: Surface cap and
land use controls;
Year cleanup action will be completed: 2006;
Estimated percent of total transuranic waste volume buried at each
location: 6.
Location: Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC;
Total waste disposal area containing transuranic wastes (in acres): 76;
Estimated total lifecycle cost to address disposal areas containing
transuranic wastes (in millions of dollars)[A]: 36.1;
Remedy assumed by DOE for cost estimation purposes: Surface cap and
institutional controls;
Year cleanup action will be completed: 2008;
Estimated percent of total transuranic waste volume buried at each
location: 4.
Location: Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID;
Total waste disposal area containing transuranic wastes (in acres):
97[C];
Estimated total lifecycle cost to address disposal areas containing
transuranic wastes (in millions of dollars)[A]: 1,027.4;
Remedy assumed by DOE for cost estimation purposes: Retrieval of
hazardous and radioactive wastes from targeted 3-acre area, surface
cap, organic vapor extraction, institutional controls;
Year cleanup action will be completed: 2025;
Estimated percent of total transuranic waste volume buried at each
location: 29.
Location: Hanford Site, Richland, WA;
Total waste disposal area containing transuranic wastes (in acres):
272;
Estimated total lifecycle cost to address disposal areas containing
transuranic wastes (in millions of dollars)[A]: 320[D];
Remedy assumed by DOE for cost estimation purposes: Retrieval of some
wastes from targeted 13-acre area, surface capping, and institutional
controls;
Year cleanup action will be completed: 2035[D];
Estimated percent of total transuranic waste volume buried at each
location: 52.
Location: Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM;
Total waste disposal area containing transuranic wastes (in acres): 85;
Estimated total lifecycle cost to address disposal areas containing
transuranic wastes (in millions of dollars)[A]: 113.9;
Remedy assumed by DOE for cost estimation purposes: Surface cap
designed for arid conditions and institutional controls;
Year cleanup action will be completed: 2015;
Estimated percent of total transuranic waste volume buried at each
location: 9.
Total;
Total waste disposal area containing transuranic wastes (in acres):
670;
Estimated total lifecycle cost to address disposal areas containing
transuranic wastes (in millions of dollars)[A]: $1,587.7;
Remedy assumed by DOE for cost estimation purposes: [Empty];
Year cleanup action will be completed: [Empty];
Estimated percent of total transuranic waste volume buried at each
location: 100.
Source: Data provided by DOE.
[A] Costs largely exclude those associated with long-term oversight of
the waste site, which are costs that will be assumed by the long-term
steward, rather than the Office of Environmental Management. Such costs
are included, however, as part of the DOE estimate for environmental
liabilities reported to the Congress, and elsewhere. See A Report to
Congress on Long-Term Stewardship, DOE/EM-0563, January 2001.
[B] Cleanup has been completed at an actual cost of $90.3 million.
[C] Only 17 acres of the 97-acre burial site at Idaho is suspected of
containing transuranic wastes.
[D] Cleanup is scheduled to be completed before 2025. This date is when
the Office of Environmental Management will transfer final control of
the property to the long-term steward. Cost estimate includes
maintenance and monitoring of the buried waste sites until 2035.
[End of table]
Cost Estimates Are Preliminary and Likely Understate the Actual Cost of
Addressing Buried Wastes:
DOE's lifecycle cost estimates for addressing buried waste sites are
preliminary because DOE is still evaluating and choosing cleanup
options for the majority of its buried waste, and some of the probable
costs associated with cleanup efforts are currently unknown. DOE has
stated that it is only 50 percent confident that its lifecycle
estimates accurately reflect the costs of addressing buried waste
sites. DOE's estimates will likely increase, perhaps substantially, for
several reasons.
First, the estimates are based upon treatment and remedy assumptions
that may be different from the final cleanup decision. The estimates
are based on DOE's assumption that it will manage most of the buried
wastes in place under engineered barriers and will monitor these
barriers' effectiveness for as long as necessary to ensure protection
of human health and the environment. This is typically the lowest-cost
approach for addressing buried waste. DOE cost estimates are
preliminary until an actual cleanup decision has been reached, at which
time the cost estimates are revised to reflect that decision. If DOE is
required to retrieve substantial portions of the buried transuranic
wastes and dispose of it off-site at WIPP or elsewhere, costs could
increase dramatically. For example if DOE must retrieve all the buried
transuranic from the Idaho National Laboratory site, the department
estimates that costs would increase from about $1 billion to about $8.2
billion. According to DOE, the substantially higher costs are the
result of activities to excavate wastes and the associated construction
and operation of new facilities to treat and dispose of formerly buried
wastes and new wastes created by the retrieval process.
Second, the authorized capacity of the WIPP is currently insufficient
to allow emplacement of large volumes of buried transuranic wastes
beyond those being exhumed at the Idaho site. Specifically, WIPP is
statutorily authorized to receive a maximum of 175,600 cubic meters of
transuranic wastes. The majority of that capacity has been reserved for
about 108,000 cubic meters of transuranic wastes that were generated
and placed in storage at various DOE sites after 1970 and had not yet
been emplaced at WIPP as of 2002, the most recent year for which data
are available. About 8,000 cubic meters of waste had already been
emplaced at WIPP by 2002. Wastes DOE has agreed to exhume from the
Idaho National Laboratory are expected to consume another 17,000 cubic
meters of WIPP capacity. In addition, DOE expects to generate about
17,000 cubic meters of additional transuranic wastes from future
nuclear research and waste cleanup activities, and these wastes also
are intended for disposal at WIPP. In total, DOE estimates that stored
wastes, newly generated wastes and the wastes being exhumed currently
at Idaho together will consume about 150,000 cubic meters of WIPP's
authorized capacity, leaving only about 25,600 cubic meters for
disposal of other transuranic wastes. DOE has estimated that if current
plans to manage most wastes in place change and buried transuranic
wastes across the weapons complex must be exhumed and disposed of off-
site, up to 85,000 additional cubic meters could potentially require
disposal at the WIPP. Developing alternative disposal paths for the
estimated 60,000 cubic meters of transuranic wastes exceeding current
WIPP capacity could further increase costs.
Third, other assumptions DOE has incorporated into its cost estimates
may also be incorrect, causing DOE's cost estimates to increase. For
example, DOE's preliminary cost estimates assume that installing a
barrier over one of the Los Alamos burial grounds will safely contain
buried wastes. However, DOE reports that if further analysis shows this
assumption is incorrect and a more complex solution, such as grouting
or vitrification is required, then cost estimates would increase
significantly. Grouting is a process that uses concrete to bind wastes
together and impede their migration through soil. Vitrification
immobilizes the wastes in glass. At two other locations, DOE has
assumed that federal and state regulators will not require further
characterization or excavation. However, if additional characterization
is required, DOE reports that costs could increase.
Finally, DOE has not included in its estimate some probable cost
amounts that are currently unknown. For example, at DOE's Hanford site,
highly radioactive and hazardous wastes were buried under 10 to15 feet
of earth in vertical pipes and other containers at a site that is near
the Columbia River. DOE has reported that the lifecycle cost to remove
these wastes is about $113 million. However, according to DOE's
Inspector General, this estimate does not include all potential costs
to store, monitor, and dispose of this waste once it has been removed,
which could increase the cost to more than $300 million.[Footnote 13]
According to DOE officials, DOE had not yet evaluated methods for
retrieving and disposing of the waste and, as a result, the costs for
these actions were unknown. In addition, both Hanford and the Idaho
National Laboratory lifecycle cost estimates exclude administrative
costs and management fees that will eventually be negotiated with the
private firms contracted to manage the cleanup effort. Since contracts
have not yet been awarded for much of the buried waste cleanup, those
costs have yet to be determined.
As DOE moves forward to further evaluate the risks, benefits, and costs
of various buried waste cleanup options, DOE's cost estimating and
project management policies expect staff to refine the
estimates.[Footnote 14]According to DOE guidance, the cost uncertainty
is greatest during the period that site investigations and evaluations
of cleanup options are being conducted. Typically, DOE includes what it
calls an "unfunded contingency" in its lifecycle estimates to account
for unanticipated future events, but officials said they do not include
the contingency at a project level that includes buried waste cleanup
estimates. DOE expects cost estimates to become somewhat more accurate
during the design phase of a project and to become substantially more
accurate once a cleanup remedy has been chosen and construction has
been authorized.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
We provided a draft of this report to the DOE for its review and
comment. In its comments, the department generally agreed with our
report. The department agreed that uncertainties surround the
disposition of buried transuranic wastes and that the volume of such
wastes intended for WIPP could increase. However, the department stated
that EPA's recertification process for WIPP, which occurs every 5
years, includes a forecast of waste disposal volumes and that current
projections do not indicate insufficient WIPP capacity. The department
further stated that it is prepared to manage the uncertainties
regarding the future disposition of these wastes. While we agree that
current projections do not indicate WIPP capacity will fall short of
future requirements, at the time of our review, cleanup decisions were
still pending at the Hanford Site and the Idaho National Laboratory.
These two sites comprise over 80 percent of DOE's total estimated
inventory of buried transuranic wastes and it is unclear how much of
these buried wastes ultimately must be exhumed. As we stated in our
report, if substantial volumes of the transuranic wastes at these sites
must be exhumed and disposed of off-site, WIPP's authorized capacity
could be inadequate.
DOE provided additional technical comments, including clarifications on
terminology and ongoing litigation at the Idaho National Laboratory. We
incorporated these clarifications as appropriate. DOE's comments are
presented in appendix II.
We will send copies of this report to the Secretary of Energy, and we
also will make copies available to others on request. In addition, the
report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at
http://www.gao.gov.
If you, or your staff, have any questions about this report or need
additional information, please contact me at (202) 512-3841 or
cosgrovej@gao.gov. Contact points for our Office of Congressional
Relations and Public Affairs can be found on the last page of this
report. Other staff contributing to this report can be found in
appendix III.
Signed by:
James Cosgrove:
Acting Director, Natural Resources and Environment:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
To conduct our work, we visited buried waste landfills and stored waste
facilities, and we met with local Department of Energy (DOE) officials
at each of DOE's five largest transuranic waste burial sites--the
Hanford Site, the Idaho National Laboratory, the Los Alamos National
Laboratory, the Savannah River Site, and the Oak Ridge National
Laboratory. We also reviewed studies and scientific reports by DOE and
other federal agencies and the National Academy of Sciences on the
storage and disposition of transuranic wastes, and interviewed experts
in the field.
To determine the extent to which legal requirements and policies govern
DOE's efforts to address buried transuranic wastes, we reviewed the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
of 1980, as amended (CERCLA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act of 1976, as amended (RCRA), the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and DOE regulations
and guidance concerning radioactive and hazardous wastes. We also
reviewed the Federal Facility Agreements and Orders between DOE, EPA,
and each state with a site where DOE has buried transuranic wastes, as
well as a May 2006 federal district court decision interpreting an
agreement between DOE and the state of Idaho concerning DOE's
obligation to remove buried transuranic wastes from the Idaho National
Laboratory site. To better understand the implementation of these laws,
regulations, policies, and agreements at DOE sites, we interviewed
state environmental regulatory officials and EPA officials that oversee
each of the buried waste locations. We did not interview EPA officials
in New Mexico because EPA has authorized the state of New Mexico to
carry out a state RCRA program under state law in lieu of the federal
program.
To determine how DOE plans to address buried waste at each of its
sites, we reviewed the planning documents DOE has prepared to comply
with CERCLA or RCRA requirements, feasibility studies describing
remediation alternatives, records of decision for sites that have
selected a remedy for buried waste, and internal DOE reports regarding
buried transuranic wastes, and interviewed the project managers and
engineers responsible for overseeing the remediation of each buried
waste site.
To determine DOE's estimated costs for addressing disposal sites
containing buried transuranic wastes and to evaluate the accuracy of
those estimates, we analyzed each field location's fiscal year 2006
lifecycle baseline estimates for specific projects that included
cleaning up previously disposed transuranic wastes. Because DOE has
generally defined cleanup projects by geographic waste disposal areas
rather than by waste types, we were unable to determine the specific
costs associated with addressing only transuranic wastes. To better
understand the lifecycle cost estimates, we reviewed DOE cost
estimating and project management guidance and interviewed officials
responsible for preparing and reporting cost estimates to DOE. All cost
estimates in this report are in constant 2006 dollars.
In reporting the volumes of transuranic wastes buried at DOE sites, we
relied on estimates made by DOE in 1999 and reported in 2000, the most
recent available comprehensive inventory of such wastes.[Footnote 15]
In reporting the inventory of buried transuranic wastes, we included
wastes buried at both shallow depths (less than 100 feet) and
intermediate depths (between 100 and 1,000 feet). In addition, we
adjusted the buried waste inventory reported for Los Alamos and Hanford
because officials there had subsequently developed more accurate
inventory data that showed a somewhat lower volume than had been
reported in 2000. At other locations, DOE officials said they believed
the 2000 report reflected the most accurate data available. With regard
to the inventory of stored transuranic wastes reported in 2000, we used
data from a 2001 DOE report.[Footnote 16] Some of that waste has now
been disposed of permanently at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)
in New Mexico. The inventory of the remaining volume of transuranic
wastes currently in storage at DOE sites continues to change because of
ongoing shipments to WIPP for permanent disposal and was not available
from DOE.
We performed our work between May 2006 and May 2007 in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Energy:
Department of Energy:
Washington, DC 20585:
June 4, 2007:
Mr. James Cosgrove:
Acting Director:
Natural Resources and Environment:
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Dear Mr. Cosgrove:
This letter provides the Department of Energy's (DOE) comments on your
draft report entitled Nuclear Waste: Plans for Addressing Most Buried
Transuranic Wastes Are Not Final and Preliminary Cost Estimates Will
Likely Increase (GAO-07-761). We are pleased that the Government
Accountability Office has no recommendations on DOE's policy framework
for making site-specific, risk-informed decisions about remediation of
buried transuranic-contaminated wastes.
We agree there are uncertainties associated with DOE's plans for buried
transuranic-contaminated wastes. As you note, future decisions could
increase the volume of transuranic wastes that would have to be
disposed of at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico.
However, we update our forecasts and reapply every five years to the
Environmental Protection Agency for WIPP certification. Our latest
certification application indicates we do not currently project that
waste volumes would exceed WIPP's capacity. We believe our existing
planning processes are sufficient to manage this uncertainty.
The enclosure provides a markup of the draft report, to better
distinguish pre-1970 buried waste from post-1970 wastes, and to clarify
litigation and cleanup activities at the Idaho National Laboratory. If
you have any questions, please contact Mr. Frank Marcinowski, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Regulatory Compliance, at (202) 586-0370.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Charles E. Anderson (Acting for)
Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management:
Enclosure:
Printed with soy ink on recycled paper:
[End of section]
Appendix III: Contact Information and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contacts:
James Cosgrove, (202) 512-3841 Gene Aloise, (202) 512-3841:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to the individuals named above, Bill Swick, Assistant
Director; Doreen Feldman; Michael Meleady; Mehrzad Nadji; James Noel;
Alison O'Neill; Jeff Rueckhaus; and Ginny Vanderlinde made key
contributions to this report.
FOOTNOTES
[1] This report refers to wastes that were generated after 1970 and
subsequently stored for deep geologic disposal at WIPP as "stored"
transuranic wastes. At some locations, these stored wastes were placed
in containers and then buried underground.
[2] Transuranic waste was first identified as a separate waste category
in 1970, and its original statutory definition was revised in 1982. For
ease of discussion, this report refers to all wastes contaminated with
transuranic elements as transuranic wastes, regardless when it was
generated or disposed or whether it meets the current statutory
definition. Transuranic wastes that were disposed of at shallow or
intermediate depths before issuance and implementation of a 1970
directive prohibiting this practice are referred to as "buried
transuranic wastes."
[3] The definition of transuranic waste specifically excludes (1) high-
level radioactive waste; (2) waste that DOE has determined with the
concurrence of EPA, does not need the degree of isolation required by
the disposal regulations; or (3) waste that the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission has approved for disposal on a case by case basis in
accordance with 10 C.F.R. part 61. See Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land
Withdrawal Act, Pub. L.No. 102-579, § 2(20), 106 Stat. 4777-79 (1992).
[4] U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Immediate Action Directive, IAD No.
0511-21, March 20, 1970.
[5] Department of Energy National Security and Military Applications of
Nuclear Energy Authorization Act of 1980, Pub. L. No. 96-164, 93 Stat.
1259, 1265 (1979).
[6] Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act, Pub. L. No. 102-
579, 106 Stat. 4777 (1992), as amended by the Waste Isolation Pilot
Plant Land Withdrawal Amendment Act, Pub. L. No. 104-201, 110 Stat.
2851 (1996).
[7] 42 U.S.C. § 9620.
[8] See 54 Fed. Reg. 48184 (Nov. 21, 1989).
[9] CERCLA, § 121(c), 42 U.S.C. § 9621(c). Under Executive Order 12580,
DOE is responsible for conducting 5-year reviews at DOE sites.
[10] Public Service Company of Colorado v. Kempthorne, CV 91-035-S-EJL
(D. Idaho, May 25, 2006). The court stated that unless something is
encountered that would prohibit its removal, the 1995 agreement
obligates the United States to remove all transuranic wastes, with the
buried transuranic waste being on a time schedule dictated by CERCLA
and the Federal Facility Agreement and Compliance Order. The court
further stated that should EPA ultimately conclude that removal of
certain waste is too dangerous and Idaho disagrees, the court would
necessarily have to resolve that dispute and retained jurisdiction to
do so.
[11] United States v. Andrus, No. 06-35661 (9th Cir. filed July 24,
2006).
[12] Radionuclides are regulated under DOE Order 5400.5, Radiation
Protection of the Public and the Environment, and DOE Order 435.1,
Radioactive Waste Management.
[13] U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Inspector General,
Remediation of the Waste Burial Grounds at the Hanford Site,
Washington, D.C.: October 2006; DOE/IG-0743.
[14] DOE G 430.1-1, Cost Estimating Guide; DOE G 430.1-1X, Cost
Estimating Guide for Program and Project Management.
[15] Department of Energy, Buried Contaminated Transuranic Waste
Information for U.S. Department of Energy Facilities, June 2000.
[16] Department of Energy, Summary Data on the Radioactive Waste, Spent
Nuclear Fuel and Contaminated Media Managed by the U.S. Department of
Energy, April 2001.
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 (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 www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548:
