Page images
PDF
EPUB

Environment and Public Works;

Recommendation To Congress: Congress Congress.

should clarify how EPA and the states Authority: Clean Air Act. Water

are to share accountability for: (1) Pollution Control Act. Safe Drinking meeting national goals and objectives; (2) Water Act. Comprehensive

achievement of environmental results, Environmental Response, Compensation, efficient use of federal funds, and and Liability Act of 1980. Insecticide,

compliance with federal regulations Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. Resource

within the individual delegated state Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. programs; and (3) the consistency of Toxic Substances Control Act. Marine programs and activities nationwide. Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries

Congress may need to make adjustments Act of 1972. Uranium Mill Tailings

in the environmental statutes or the Radiation Control Act of 1978.

resources provided EPA and the states Environmental Policy Act of 1969

to carry out their respective roles and (National). Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.

meet congressional expectations as to Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. program accountability. 551 et seq.). Water Pollution Control Act Recommendation To Agencies: To Amendments of 1972 (Federal) (86 Stat.

enhance and facilitate EPA efforts to 904). Hazardous and Solid Waste

manage for measurable environmental Amendments of 1984. Clean Water Act results, the Administrator, EPA, should: of 1977. Paperwork Reduction Act of (1) develop a clear and cohesive 1980 (P.L. 96-511). Federal Managers'

statement of the policy goal to guide all Financial Integrity Act of 1982.

parts of the agency in moving toward Superfund Amendments and

managing for measurable environmental Reauthorization Act of 1986. Executive

results; (2) make clear the relationships Order 12552. OMB Circular A-130. OMB

between this policy goal and other Circular A-123. OMB Circular A-127. agency goals and management themes Abstract: GAO performed a

and link them clearly to the annual

priority list to establish a basis for management review of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

tracking their progress in the agency's to determine how EPA can: (1) make and

planning and budgeting systems; and (3)

set and communicate clear concepts on sustain management improvements to strengthen policy development; (2) better

how the policy goal relates to current

legislation and proposed changes and to achieve program initiatives; (3) improve

agency efforts in addressing the integrity of management support

environmental problems that cut across systems; and (4) enhance planning for

several environmental media, using risk future environmental issues.

assessment and management tools, and Findings/Conclusions: GAO found that

developing and using environmental EPA actions to increase managerial and measures and indicators of progress. To operational effectiveness included: (1)

better identify the most significant managing programs and activities with

issues to be addressed in order to emphasis on achieving measurable

achieve an integrated, cross-media environmental results; (2) establishing program for accomplishing measurable more effective working arrangements environmental results, the with states; and (3) obtaining improved Administrator, EPA, should better financial, management and

utilize and build on the results of the programmatic information to better set Comparative Risk Project, Strategic priorities, administer programs, and Planning Initiatives, and initiatives for assess programs. GAO also found that

greater participation by regional offices EPA: (1) lacked clearly defined goals for and the states. This should include managing for measurable environmental beginning the planning to undertake a results; (2) has not ranked program second Comparative Risk Study in 2 or 3 priorities or made essential links

years, when some of the data and between actions and desired results; (3) analytical gaps have been filled. To has made only limited progress in

better identify the most significant developing measures of environmental issues to be addressed in order to quality and linking them to program achieve an integrated, cross-media activities; (4) has numerous design and program for accomplishing measurable implementation problems and

environmental results, the information gaps which limit its

Administrator, EPA, should better research effectiveness; (5) has achieved utilize and build on the results of the some success in balancing its oversight Comparative Risk Project, Strategic needs with states' needs for flexibility Planning Initiatives, and initiatives for and autonomy; and (6) lacked fully greater participation by regional offices developed data standards and data and the states. This should include requirements and definitions across articulating decision rules for balancing programs.

efforts directed at human health and

those aimed at preserving and
maintaining the environment. To better
identify the most significant issues to be
addressed in order to achieve an
integrated, cross-media program for
accomplishing measurable
environmental results, the
Administrator, EPA, should better
utilize and build on the results of the
Comparative Risk Project, Strategic
Planning Initiatives, and initiatives for
greater participation by regional offices
and the states. This should include
undertaking risk studies in all 10
regions to build the analytical base for
regional office participation in the
development of the priority list and the
Agency Operating Guidance. To better
identify the most significant issues to be
addressed in order to achieve an
integrated, cross-media program for
accomplishing measurable
environmental results, the
Administrator, EPA, should better
utilize and build on the results of the
Comparative Risk Project, Strategic
Planning Initiatives, and initiatives for
greater participation by regional offices
and the states. This should include
ensuring that, as priorities are refined
through additional analysis, they are
linked to proposals for legislative
changes and reflected in budget
formulation, the Agency Operating
Guidance, allocation of resources to the
regions, and accountability measures. To
better identify the most significant
issues to be addressed in order to
achieve an integrated, cross-media
program for accomplishing measurable
environmental results, the
Administrator, EPA, should better
utilize and build on the results of the
Comparative Risk Project, Strategic
Planning Initiatives, and initiatives for
greater participation by regional offices
and the states. This should include using
the waste system flow chart developed
by the Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response in its Strategic
Planning Initiative as a technique to
include more pollution sources and their
pathways and receptors to permit wider
consideration of cross-media transfers
and possible solutions. To better identify
the most significant issues to be
addressed in order to achieve an
integrated, cross-media program for
accomplishing measurable
environmental results, the
Administrator, EPA, should better
utilize and build on the results of the
Comparative Risk Project, Strategic
Planning Initiatives, and initiatives for
greater participation by regional offices
and the states. This should include
utilizing the experience of the Near
Coastal Waters Strategic Planning

Initiative in developing strategies in other program areas. Specifically, the problem definition, consideration of options, and ranking system used to classify estuaries and near coastal waters by severity of problems can be adapted to better focus attention on sites with the most environmentally significant problems. To better identify the most significant issues to be addressed in order to achieve an integrated, cross-media program for accomplishing measurable environmental results, the Administrator, EPA, should better utilize and build on the results of the Comparative Risk Project, Strategic Planning Initiatives, and initiatives for greater participation by regional offices and the states. This should include involving the regions more effectively in the development of agency priorities by having them develop and rank their own priorities and give a regional presentation at the annual planning meeting. To provide better guidance for developing resource requirements and making trade-offs during budget formulation, developing operational plans and budgets, and selecting appropriate accountability measures, the Administrator, EPA, should revise the priority list to: (1) state priorities in measurable short- and long-term statements to provide the missing link between policy guidance in the priority list, the Agency Operating Guidance, and managerial accountability; and (2) provide a way to determine relative importance by ranking the priority list. To provide an operational link between work done and results to be achieved, as indicated by measurable priority statements, the Administrator, EPA, should refine planning system accountability measures by stating measures and objectives in terms that are both operational and measurable. To provide an operational link between work done and results to be achieved, as indicated by measurable priority statements, the Administrator, EPA, should refine planning system accountability measures by including productivity goals in the measures as a way of assessing quality, timeliness, and efficiency of service delivery. To better link decisions on what areas are of greatest importance to the agency, as indicated in the priority list, with the formulation of the future-year budget, the Administrator, EPA, should make greater use of existing flexibility to shift resources to higher priority issues by consulting regularly with Congress to identify areas of flexibility under current law and gain congressional support where changes are needed. To

better link decisions on what areas are of greatest importance to the agency, as indicated in the priority list, with the formulation of the future-year budget, the Administrator, EPA, should make greater use of existing flexibility to shift resources to higher priority issues by utilizing the Statutory Review Project to document existing areas of legislative flexibility, inform executives and managers, identify legislative barriers to be addressed, and prepare proposals for legislative changes required. To better link decisions on what areas are of greatest importance to the agency, as indicated in the priority list, with the formulation of the future-year budget, the Administrator, EPA, should make greater use of existing flexibility to shift resources to higher priority issues by using flexibility consistent with current and proposed legislation to shift a percentage of the total agency budget annually from issues of lower priority to those of higher priority. To better link decisions on what areas are of greatest importance to the agency, as indicated in the priority list, with the formulation of the future-year budget, the Administrator, EPA, should make greater use of existing flexibility to shift resources to higher priority issues by increasing the Administrator's options for shifting resources across media and program offices by modifying the budget guidance to ask assistant administrators to submit, with their proposed budgets, information on how they would accomplish their work within a percent range of fewer resources in lowerpriority activities and how additional resources could achieve greater measurable results in higher-priority activities. To better link decisions on what areas are of greatest importance to the agency, as indicated in the priority list, with the formulation of the futureyear budget, the Administrator, EPA, should make greater use of existing flexibility to shift resources to higher priority issues by refocusing the lead region approach to reflect cross-media planning and budgeting and to enhance regional participation in budgeting. To ensure that operational planning drives the development of operating budgets and to improve linkages between agency planning and budget systems so that resource allocation supports accomplishment of the Administrator's priorities, the Administrator, EPA, should correct the timing of the development of operating budgets, including the use of work-load models for allocating regional resources, so that the development of operational plans to carry out the Agency Operating Guidance precedes allocation of

resources. To ensure that operational planning drives the development of operating budgets and to improve linkages between agency planning and budget systems so that resource allocation supports accomplishment of the Administrator's priorities, the Administrator, EPA, should build institutional mechanisms between the Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation and the Office of Administration and Resources Management by: (1) combining annual guidance for operational planning and developing operating budgets into a single document that clearly links the two; and (2) instituting joint reviews of proposed plans and budgets by the Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation and the Comptroller's Office to ensure that the two processes are serving their appropriate roles in supporting the priority list. To ensure that operational planning drives the development of operating budgets and to improve linkages between agency planning and budget systems so that resource allocation supports accomplishment of the Administrator's priorities, the Administrator, EPA, should correct the current lack of integration of planning and budgeting in the Resource Planning and Budgeting Manual and the Strategic Planning and Management System Reference Paper by issuing a joint, comprehensive, consistent document or correcting and more adequately reflecting both systems in separate documents on each. To more fully utilize its reprogramming authority to shift resources to priority issues during the execution phase of the management cycle and better link oversight activities regarding the achievement of planned goals, including planning system targets, and the use of resources, the Administrator, EPA, should provide guidance on available reprogramming flexibility and, through meetings and training sessions, inform program and regional office officials about the conditions for using this flexibility. To more fully utilize its reprogramming authority to shift resources to priority issues during the execution phase of the management cycle and better link oversight activities regarding the achievement of planned goals, including planning system targets, and the use of resources, the Administrator, EPA, should revise the Resource Planning and Budgeting Manual to stress the use of reprogramming as a method of responding to agency priorities. For example, the section on reprogramming, as it applies to budget execution, needs to emphasize its use as a way to shift funds to priority list areas. To more fully

utilize its reprogramming authority to operating and monitoring activities, as shift resources to priority issues during well as similar data collected by states the execution phase of the management and other federal agencies, to determine cycle and better link oversight activities if these data might be appropriate for regarding the achievement of planned use in assessing program results. To goals, including planning system targets, revitalize and better direct EPA efforts and the use of resources, the

to identify environmental measures, as a Administrator, EPA, should use the way of achieving its goal of managing quarterly planning system reviews as a for measurable environmental results, combined progress review on

the Administrator, EPA, should adopt performance targets and review of

the framework for organizing and resource utilization to identify

collecting management and opportunities to reprogram funds from environmental data and concentrate lower to higher priorities. This could agency efforts on identifying and testing include: (1) considering issues in the the best available measures. The process priority list for the operating year, as should include recognizing the well as for the future fiscal year, as

vulnerability of monitoring and survey candidates for resource shifts in

activities to budget reductions when quarterly reviews with national program making decisions relating to the managers and review sessions with expansion, termination, or reduction of regional offices; and (2) reviewing the these activities. A necessary step in extent to which various levels of

evaluating program effectiveness is to management are using reprogramming link program activities to measures of to move resources from lower priority environmental quality and to decisions areas to higher priority issues. To

on allocation and targeting of resources. revitalize and better direct EPA efforts The Administrator, EPA, should begin to identify environmental measures, as a taking the steps necessary to link way of achieving its goal of managing program and monitoring activities to for measurable environmental results, environmental indicators. Efforts the Administrator, EPA, should adopt underway in Region 4 appear to provide the framework for organizing and a good starting point. To ensure the collecting management and

continued strengthening of a sound environmental data and concentrate analytic base needed for assessing and agency efforts on identifying and testing managing environmental risks, the the best available measures. The process Administrator, EPA, should identify the should include assigning specific

critical research needs for implementing responsibility for the effort and

the initiative of managing for establishing time frames for completion, measurable environmental results and allocation of resources, and peer review establish a process or structure to ensure or oversight. To revitalize and better that these needs are met. To ensure the direct EPA efforts to identify

continued strengthening of a sound environmental measures, as a way of analytic base needed for assessing and achieving its goal of managing for managing environmental risks, the measurable environmental results, the Administrator, EPA, should assess the Administrator, EPA, should adopt the status of methods and activities for framework for organizing and collecting determining exposure, particularly management and environmental data human exposure, to pollutants, to and concentrate agency efforts on

provide a basis for deciding the identifying and testing the best available additional research needed to develop measures. The process should include and use effective methods. To ensure the assessing the progress being made in continued strengthening of a sound Region 10, on the Conservation

analytic base needed for assessing and Foundation project, and the work at managing environmental risks, the Corvallis Laboratory to determine how Administrator, EPA, should establish a they can contribute to measurement long-range research planning process for identification and implementation. To addressing research needs. As part of revitalize and better direct EPA efforts this effort, the Administrator should to identify environmental measures, as a evaluate the present Research way of achieving its goal of managing Committee process of developing the for measurable environmental results, agency's research agenda with a view the Administrator, EPA, should adopt toward determining how it can be the framework for organizing and

revised to ensure a proper balance collecting management and

between the agency's short- and longenvironmental data and concentrate term research needs. To more effectively agency efforts on identifying and testing accomplish the objectives of the the best available measures. The process demonstration projects, the should include revisiting its past surveys Administrator, EPA, should review the and data collected as part of its

results of the Integrated Environmental

Management Program geographic
studies to identify achievements,
limitations, problems, and lessons
learned that are common to the projects
so that the results are effectively
disseminated and used to improve future
geographic studies. To more effectively
accomplish the objectives of the
demonstration projects, the
Administrator, EPA, should review the
results of the Integrated Environmental
Management Program geographic
studies to identify changes that need to
be made in the management of
demonstration projects in general. To
ensure that the goal and initiatives of
managing for measurable environmental
results are being implemented,
monitored, and accomplished and to
implement the previous
recommendations, the Administrator,
EPA, should establish an organizational
focus as a way for providing the
leadership to ensure the successful
implementation and achievement of the
initiative. A focal point could be an
individual, a group, or an office
designated as responsible for seeing that
the necessary policies, procedures,
processes, and systems are developed,
implemented, monitored, and revised to
ensure that progress is being made in
effectively achieving the initiative. To
help sustain and advance current EPA
efforts to establish a more effective
federal/state relationship in carrying
out national environmental programs,
the Administrator, EPA, should identify
cases of individual state transaction
review by EPA and reassess whether
such procedures are essential. If the
procedures are not essential or can be
substituted for with other monitoring
techniques, they should be eliminated.
To help sustain and advance current
EPA efforts to establish a more effective
federal/state relationship in carrying
out national environmental programs,
the Administrator, EPA, should, to the
extent feasible, provide multiyear,
instead of the current annual, guidance
to the states and work with Congress to
consider providing multiyear financial
assistance. To help sustain and advance
current EPA efforts to establish a more
effective federal/state relationship in
carrying out national environmental
programs, the Administrator, EPA,
should improve evaluations of state
program performance, especially with
regard to incorporating the
measurement of environmental results.
In communicating and addressing
performance problems, the
Administrator should stress the type and
amount of improvement needed and
options available to the states to take
corrective action. To help sustain and

advance current EPA efforts to establish Organization Concerned: Department of a more effective federal/state

the Army; Environmental Protection relationship in carrying out national Agency; Hercules Engines, Inc. environmental programs, the

Congressional Relevance: House Administrator, EPA, should establish

Committee on Energy and Commerce: specific guidelines as to when and under

Energy and Power Subcommittee; Rep. what circumstances EPA will begin Philip R. Sharp. action to take back delegated program

Authority: Clean Air Act. authority. These guidelines should be

Abstract: In response to a congressional communicated to both agency staff and the states for use in cases where

request, GAO reviewed the Army's evaluations find that state performance

purchase of engines for its 2-1/2-ton is poor. The Administrator, EPA, should

truck, specifically the: (1) Army's plans take the lead in working with Congress

for a new family of medium tactical and the states to reassess the current

vehicles; (2) Environmental Protection federal/state relationship and to

Agency's (EPA) position on the Army's determine whether a more

adherence to federal pollution standards comprehensive approach is needed to

for the engines; and (3) status of the accomplish EPA, state, and

Army's plans to replace the current congressional objectives and expectations

engines. for the partnership. The Administrator,

Findings/Conclusions: GAO found that EPA, should take appropriate steps to

the: (1) Army has used the same basic develop a long-range, mission-based plan truck engine since 1960 and has awarded that focuses on the actual use and value contracts to the same engine producer of information in achieving EPA goals.

since 1969; (2) engines did not meet 1988 Specifically, the plan should define the emission standards, since the contractor framework for developing a modern

based the engines on old technical data; information resources management (3) Army initiated a plan to acquire new infrastructure, which will: (1) establish vehicles that would address the aging high-level management authority for fleet problem and reduce existing planning, directing, and implementing shortages; (4) new vehicles would consist information resources management of commercially manufactured trucks activities; (2) establish a data

modified for military use with engines architecture that identifies the agency's that would meet EPA emission data flows and relates its data assets to standards in effect during the first year operational needs; and (3) further

of engine manufacture; (5) Army improve data and voice networks needed requested that EPA approve an for the conduct of business at

exemption from the Clean Air Act for operational locations across the nation. the engines currently under production In modernizing and improving EPA until implementation of its new plan; financial activities, the Administrator, and (6) Army decided that it would EPA, should continue to provide the install new replacement engines as support and priority needed for financial current ones failed and repair the systems developmental efforts. In

salvageable ones in order to meet an modernizing and improving EPA

EPA requirement that it not procure the
financial activities, the Administrator, current engine after 1991.
EPA, should institute an annual audit of
EPA financial statements.

136683

Nuclear Waste: Quarterly Report on 136624

DOE's Nuclear Waste Program as Army Vehicles: Procurement of 2- of June 30, 1988. RCED-88-204BR; B1/2-Ton Truck Engines. NSIAD-88- 202377. August 29, 1988. 20 pp. plus 215FS; B-231261. August 15, 1988.

2 appendices (2 pp.). Briefing Report
Released August 23, 1988. 4 pp. Fact to Sen. J. Bennett Johnston,
Sheet to Rep. Philip R. Sharp, Chairman, Chairman, Senate Committee on
House Committee on Energy and

Energy and Natural Resources; Sen.
Commerce: Energy and Power

James A. McClure, Ranking
Subcommittee; by Mark E. Gebicke, Minority Member, Senate
Associate Director, National Security Committee on Energy and Natural
and International Affairs Division. Resources; by Keith O. Fultz, Senior

Associate Director, Resources,
Issue Area: Army: Other Issue Area
Work (5591).

Community, and Economic

Development Division. Refer to Contact: National Security and

RCED-89-22FS, November 22, 1988,
International Affairs Division.

Accession Number 137374.
Budget Function: National Defense:
Department of Defense - Procurement Issue Area: Energy: Effectiveness and
and Contracts (051.2).

Efficiency of Implementation of National

Nuclear Waste Disposal Policies and
Programs (6404).
Contact: Resources, Community, and
Economic Development Division.
Budget Function: Energy: Energy
Information, Policy, and Regulation
(276.0).
Organization Concerned: Department of
Energy; Department of Energy: Office of
Civilian Radioactive Waste
Management; Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
Congressional Relevance: Senate
Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources; Sen. James A. McClure; Sen.
J. Bennett Johnston.
Authority: Nuclear Waste Policy Act of
1982. P.L. 100-203.
Abstract: Pursuant to a congressional
request, GAO discussed key nuclear
waste program activities occurring in
the quarter ending June 30, 1988, and
related activities occurring in July 1988.
Findings/Conclusions: GAO found that:
(1) in May 1988, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission issued final point papers on
the Department of Energy's (DOE)
Yucca Mountain draft site
characterization plan, finding that DOE
inadequately considered alternative
conceptual models and did not provide
an adequate quality assurance program;
(2) in June 1988, DOE released a draft
mission plan amendment to federal
agencies, states, and others for comment;
and (3) in April 1988, DOE reorganized
its Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste
Management, placing more emphasis on
quality assurance, facility licensing,
integration of all waste system
components, and interactions with
affected governments, the public, and
other organizations.

136742
(Extent of Problems and Cost to
Revitalize the Nation's Nuclear
Defense Complex). T-RCED-88-61.
August 23, 1988. 12 pp. Testimony
before the National Academy of
Sciences: Committee to provide
Interim Oversight of the DOE
Nuclear Weapons Complex; by J.
Dexter Peach, Assistant Comptroller
General, Resources, Community, and
Economic Development Division.
Refer to RCED-88-197BR, July 6,
1988, Accession Number 136310;
RCED-86-192, September 8, 1986,
Accession Number 131121; RCED-88-
137, July 8, 1988, Accession Number
136307; EMD-81-108, August 4, 1981,
Accession Number 115979; RCED-86-
175, June 16, 1986, Accession
Number 130260; RCED-88-62,
December 16, 1987, Accession

[ocr errors]

Number 134766; and T-RCED-87-4, Released September 12, 1988. 33 pp. plus the states' restrictions affected its ability March 12, 1987, Accession Number 1 appendix (1 p.). Briefing Report to Sen. to carry out its dredging responsibilities. 132384.

David Durenberger, Cochairman, Senate

Great Lakes Task Force; Sen. John H. Contact: Resources, Community, and Glenn, Cochairman, Senate Great Lakes

136759 Economic Development Division. Task Force; by James Duffus, III,

[Status of the Department of Organization Concerned: National Associate Director, Resources,

Energy's Waste Isolation Pilot Academy of Sciences: Committee to Community, and Economic Development Plant). T-RCED-88-63. September 13, Provide Interim Oversight of the DOE Division.

1988. 15 pp. Testimony before the Nuclear Weapons Complex; Department

House Committee on Government Issue Area: Natural Resources of Energy Management: Other Issue Area Work

Operations: Environment, Energy Authority: Resource Conservation and

and Natural Resources (6991); Environmental Protection: Other Recovery Act of 1976. Comprehensive

Subcommittee; by Keith O. Fultz, Issue Area Work (6891). Environmental Response, Compensation,

Senior Associate Director, Resources, Contact: Resources, Community, and and Liability Act of 1980. Department of Economic Development Division.

Community, and Economic Energy Organization Act. Executive

Development Division. Refer to TBudget Function: Natural Resources Order 12088.

RCED-89-50, June 12, 1989, and Environment: Water Resources Abstract: GAO discussed the adequacy of (301.0).

Accession Number 138838; and

RCED-90-1, December 8, 1989, the Department of Energy's (DOE) Organization Concerned: Department of

Accession Number 140369. efforts to strengthen environmental, the Army: Corps of Engineers; safety, and health (ES&H) oversight of Environmental Protection Agency.

Contact: Resources, Community, and its nuclear defense complex. GAO found

Congressional Relevance: Senate Great Economic Development Division. that: (1) because DOE built much of the Lakes Task Force; Sen. John H. Glenn;

Organization Concerned: Department of nuclear defense complex under less Sen. David Durenberger.

Energy; Nuclear Regulatory stringent codes and standards than exist Authority: Clean Water Act of 1977.

Commission; Environmental Protection now, many facilities have deteriorated to

Abstract: Pursuant to a congressional Agency. the point where they now have safety or request, GAO provided information

Congressional Relevance: House operational problems; (2) many of the regarding the Army Corps of Engineers' plants' processes and equipment items

Committee on Government Operations: use of overflow dredging on the Great are obsolete, making repair work

Environment, Energy and Natural Lakes, focusing on: (1) its environmental difficult and spare parts hard to procure;

Resources Subcommittee. . impact; (2) relevant legislation and (3) many of the facilities are rated below guidance; (3) cost-effectiveness; and (4)

Authority: Department of Energy, the industry average; and (4) for over 30 extent of use in areas with highly

National Security and Military years, DOE facilities have contaminated contaminated sediment.

Applications of Nuclear Energy groundwater and soil in disposing of

Authorization Act, 1980 (P.L. 96-164). Findings/Conclusions: GAO found that hazardous wastes. GAO also found that: the Corps: (1) did not assess the

Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. Safe (1) to upgrade existing facilities, clean up environmental impact of overflow

Drinking Water Act. S. 1272 (100th environmental contamination, dispose of dredging, but did research its cost

Cong.). H.R. 2504 (100th Cong.). radioactive wastes, and decontaminate effectiveness and the impact of sediment

Abstract: GAO discussed the the facilities would cost about $100 resuspension on open water disposal; (2)

Department of Energy's (DOE) Waste billion to $130 billion; (2) expanded estimated that research regarding the

Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) storage production and the relocation of environmental impact of overflow

facility for transuranic (TRU) nuclear facilities would add $15 billion to $25 dredging could take 7 years and cost $8

waste. GAO found that DOE needs to: (1) billion to the overall cost; and (3) the million; (3) allowed overflow dredging in

address brine seepage problems at the DOE advisory committee on safety was 18 percent of the 74 Great Lakes projects facility; (2) develop a plan that provides not independent and did not have the it conducted during fiscal years 1986 and

technical justification for storing TRU authority to require DOE to address its 1987; (4) complied with Environmental wastes underground; (3) ensure that the findings and recommendations. GAO Protection Agency (EPA) regulations by facility will comply with revised believes that DOE needs: (1) external, identifying sediment composition and

Environmental Protection Agency independent oversight of the complex's forwarding the results and its proposed disposal standards; and (4) obtain the safety aspects; (2) a strong internal methods to EPA, the Fish and Wildlife Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) program to ensure safe and Service, and the state for concurrence

certification that the type of containers environmentally acceptable facility before soliciting bids for dredging; (5) it plans to use for transporting TRU operation; (3) an Assistant Secretary for determined that, since overflow dredging wastes meets NRC standards. GAO also ES&H; (4) a formal, systematic program was the least expensive dredging method found that DOE: (1) reduced the quantity for assessing whether its facilities meet in many areas, banning it could increase of wastes that it plans to store at WIPP; current commercial standards; and (5) a dredging costs by 30 to 55 percent; and (2) changed its planned date to receive modernization plan that sets the (6) allowed overflow dredging in only one

TRU wastes from October 1988 to the projected facility requirements for area of highly contaminated sediment first quarter of 1989; and (3) plans to continued nuclear weapons production. and restricted its use according to EPA conduct a long-term environmental

guidelines. GAO also found that: (1) EPA impact study to determine the suitability 136748

of the facility for permanent waste lacked national and regional guidelines

regarding overflow dredging; (2) states storage. GAO believes that Congress Water Resources: An In-Depth used EPA regional guidelines regarding may wish to consider: (1) allowing DOE Look at Overflow Dredging on the open water disposal of sediment to make to conduct underground experiments Great Lakes. RCED-88-200BR; B- decisions regarding overflow dredging; using TRU wastes; and (2) postponing 231928. August 11, 1988.

and (3) the Corps believed that some of land withdrawal legislation pending a

« PreviousContinue »