GAO Report Released: Hazardous Waste Cleanup: Observations on States' Role, Liabilities at DOD and Hardrock Mining Sites, and Litigation Issues

Recently, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report, titled Hazardous Waste Cleanup: Observations on States' Role, Liabilities at DOD and Hardrock Mining Sites, and Litigation Issues GAO-13-633T (May 22, 2013). The details of the 24-page report, available here, are discussed below:

Why GAO Did This Study

According to EPA, the agency that manages the nation's principal hazardous waste cleanup program, one in four Americans lives within 3 miles of a hazardous waste site. Many such sites pose health and other risks, and their cleanup can be lengthy and expensive. EPA's Superfund program, established under [Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act ] CERCLA, provides a process to address contaminated sites. Under CERCLA, parties that contributed to the contamination of a site are generally liable for cleanup and related costs. These parties may include federal agencies, such as DOD, and companies. Based on the risk a site poses, EPA may place the site on the [National Priorities List] NPL, a list that includes some of the nation's most seriously contaminated sites. As of April 2013, the NPL included about 1,300 sites, and states and federal agencies may address additional contaminated sites outside of EPA's Superfund program. GAO's prior work has identified challenges cleaning up DOD's NPL sites and abandoned mining sites and has assessed litigation related to the Superfund program.

In this testimony, GAO summarizes its work from March 2008 to April 2013 on (1) the role of states in cleaning up hazardous waste sites, (2) DOD's management of its sites on the NPL, (3) federal liabilities from contaminated hardrock mining sites, and (4) litigation under CERCLA and other statutes.

GAO is not making new recommendations but has made numerous recommendations to DOD, EPA, and Interior to better address hazardous waste sites. As described in this statement, the responses to these recommendations have varied.

National Academies Report Released: Potential Health Risks to DOD Firing-Range Personnel from Recurrent Lead Exposure

Recently, the National Academies Press (NAP) released a report produced by the Committee on Potential Health Risks from Recurrent Lead Exposure of DOD Firing-Range Personnel; Committee on Toxicology; Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology; Division on Earth and Life Sciences; and the The National Research Council titled, Potential Health Risks to DOD Firing-Range Personnel from Recurrent Lead Exposure (2012). The 182-page report is available free with a one-time registration. According to the abstract,

Lead is a ubiquitous metal in the environment, and its adverse effects on human health are well documented. Lead interacts at multiple cellular sites and can alter protein function in part through binding to amino acid sulfhydryl and carboxyl groups on a wide variety of structural and functional proteins. In addition, lead mimics calcium and other divalent cations, and it induces the increased production of cytotoxic reactive oxygen species. Adverse effects associated with lead exposure can be observed in multiple body systems, including the nervous, cardiovascular, renal, hematologic, immunologic, and reproductive systems. Lead exposure is also known to induce adverse developmental effects in utero and in the developing neonate.

Lead poses an occupational health hazard, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) developed a lead standard for general industry that regulates many workplace exposures to this metal. The standard was promulgated in 1978 and encompasses several approaches for reducing exposure to lead, including the establishment of a permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 50 μg/m3 in air (an 8-hour time-weighted average [TWA]), exposure guidelines for instituting medical surveillance, guidelines for removal from and return to work, and other risk-management strategies. An action level of 30 μg/m3 (an 8-hour TWA) for lead was established to trigger medical surveillance in employees exposed above that level for more than 30 days per year. Another provision is that any employee who has a blood lead level (BLL) of 60 μg/dL or higher or three consecutive BLLs averaging 50 μg/dL or higher must be removed from work involving lead exposure. An employee may resume work associated with lead exposure only after two BLLs are lower than 40 μg/dL. Thus, maintaining BLLs lower than 40 μg/dL was judged by OSHA to protect workers from adverse health effects. The OSHA standard also includes a recommendation that BLLs of workers who are planning a pregnancy be under 30μg/dL.

In light of knowledge about the hazards posed by occupational lead exposure, the Department of Defense (DOD) asked the National Research Council to evaluate potential health risks from recurrent lead exposure of firing-range personnel. Specifically, DOD asked the National Research Council to determine whether current exposure standards for lead on DOD firing ranges protect its workers adequately.The committee also considered measures of cumulative lead dose. Potential Health Risks to DOD Firing-Range Personnel from Recurrent Lead Exposure will help to inform decisions about setting new air exposure limits for lead on firing ranges, about whether to implement limits for surface contamination, and about how to design lead-surveillance programs for range personnel appropriately.

Nuclear Waste: Actions Needed to Address Persistent Concerns with Efforts to Close Underground Radioactive Waste Tanks at DOE's Savannah River Site

This government Accountability Report (GAO-10-816) dated September 14, 2010, finds that emptying, cleaning, and permanently closing the 22 underground liquid radioactive waste tanks at the Savannah River Site is likely to cost significantly more and take longer than estimated in the December 2008 contract between DOE and SRR. Originally estimated to cost $3.2 billion, SRR notified DOE in June 2010 that the total cost to close the 22 tanks had increased by more than $1.4 billion or 44 percent. Much of this increase is because DOE’s cost estimate in the September 2007 request for proposals that formed the basis of the December 2008 contract between DOE and SRR was not accurate or comprehensive. For example, DOE underestimated the costs of labor and fringe benefits. DOE also omitted certain other costs related to equipment and services needed to support tank closure activities.

Perchlorate: Occurrence Is Widespread but at Varying Levels; Federal Agencies Have Taken Some Actions to Respond to and Lessen Releases -- GAO Report

This Government Accountability Office Report to the Ranking Member, Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. Senate (GAO-10-769) dated August, 2010, states that perchlorate has been found in water and other media at varying levels in 45 states, as well as in the food supply, and comes from a variety of sources. The EPA conducted one nationwide perchlorate sampling, between 2001 and 2005, and detected perchlorate at or above 4 parts per billion in 160 of the 3,865 public water systems tested (about 4.1 percent). In 31 of these 160 systems, perchlorate was found above 15 parts per billion, EPA’s current interim health advisory level. Sampling by DOD, NASA, and DOE detected perchlorate in drinking water, groundwater, surface water, soil, and sediment at some facilities.

For example, GAO’s analysis of DOD data showed that perchlorate was detected at almost 70 percent of the 407 installations sampled from fiscal years 1997 through 2009, with detections ranging from less than 1 part per billion to 2.6 million parts per billion. A 2006 Food and Drug Administration study found perchlorate in 74 percent of 285 food items tested, with certain foods, such as tomatoes and spinach, having higher perchlorate levels than others. According to researchers, concentrations of perchlorate at or above 100 parts per billion generally result from activities involving man-made perchlorate, such as the use of perchlorate as a rocket propellant. Lower concentrations can result from the use of man-made perchlorate, atmospheric processes, or the use of fertilizer containing naturally occurring perchlorate.